core of rosslyn transportation study - amazon web services€¦ · core of rosslyn transportation...

Core of Rosslyn Transportation Study Final Existing Conditions Report

Prepared for:

Arlington County Department of Environmental Services

Transportation Division, Transportation Engineering & Operations Bureau

2100 Clarendon Boulevard, Suite 900

Arlington, VA

Prepared by:

11400 Commerce Park Drive, Suite 400

Reston, VA

August 1, 2018

https://www.google.com/url?sa=i&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=images&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwia1ICj1PfWAhWD4CYKHagvBjMQjRwIBw&url=https://www.arlingtonva.us/&psig=AOvVaw0BbDcjDlOpklTc4VsVnqJd&ust=1508329726052222

Core of Rosslyn Transportation Study Existing Conditions Report

Page 1 i

Table of Contents Introduction ............................................................................................ 1

Previous Plans ..................................................................................... 3

Existing Conditions Report Structure and Purpose ............................. 3

Overview ................................................................................................. 4

Regional Context ................................................................................. 4

Study Area ........................................................................................... 5

Street Network .................................................................................... 7

Regional Commuting Patterns ............................................................ 8

Mode Share ....................................................................................... 11

Performance Measures ......................................................................... 13

Transit ................................................................................................... 15

Infrastructure .................................................................................... 15

Service ............................................................................................... 16

Existing Condition Transit Measures ................................................. 20

Pedestrians ............................................................................................ 21

Network ............................................................................................ 21

Usage ................................................................................................. 22

Existing Condition Pedestrian Measures .......................................... 23

Bicycles .................................................................................................. 25

Network ............................................................................................ 25

Usage ................................................................................................. 26

Bicycle Level of Traffic Stress ............................................................ 28

Existing Condition Bicycle Measures ................................................. 29

Vehicles ................................................................................................. 31

Traffic Volume and Travel Patterns .................................................. 31

Travel Time and Speed ...................................................................... 40

Vehicle Traffic Operations Analysis ................................................... 45

Existing Conditions Vehicle Measures .............................................. 55

Parking and Curbspace.......................................................................... 56

Existing Condition Parking and Curbspace Measures ....................... 58

Urban Design ......................................................................................... 59

Existing Condition Urban Design Measures ...................................... 61

Existing Conditions Summary................................................................ 62

Travel Patterns .................................................................................. 62

Transit ............................................................................................... 62

Pedestrians ........................................................................................ 62

Bicycles .............................................................................................. 63

Vehicles ............................................................................................. 63

Parking and Curbspace ...................................................................... 64

Urban Design ..................................................................................... 64



Page 2 ii

List of Figures Figure 1: Realize Rosslyn Vision Statement and Principles ..................... 2

Figure 2: Regional Context Map .............................................................. 4

Figure 3: Study Area ................................................................................ 6

Figure 4: Street Network ......................................................................... 7

Figure 5: Commute Trips from Rosslyn ................................................... 8

Figure 6: Commute Trips To Rosslyn ....................................................... 9

Figure 7: Study Area Travel Patterns .................................................... 10

Figure 8: Mode Share of Workers from Rosslyn Study Area ................ 11

Figure 9: Mode Share of Commute Trips to Rosslyn Study Area .......... 12

Figure 10: Transit Infrastructure ........................................................... 15

Figure 11: Average Weekday Metrorail Ridership – Rosslyn ................ 16

Figure 12: Local Bus Routes .................................................................. 17

Figure 13: Commuter Bus Routes ......................................................... 18

Figure 14: Pedestrian Network ............................................................. 21

Figure 15: Pedestrian Network Usage .................................................. 22

Figure 16: Existing Peak Hour Simulated Intersection Pedestrian Delay

(VISSIM) ................................................................................................. 24

Figure 17: Bike Network ........................................................................ 25

Figure 18: Bike Network Usage ............................................................. 26

Figure 19: Bikeshare Trips per Quarter Year in Rosslyn ........................ 27

Figure 20: Bike Level of Traffic Stress ................................................... 28

Figure 21 Existing Peak Hour Simulated Intersection Bicycle Delay

(VISSIM) ................................................................................................. 30

Figure 22: Annual Average Daily Traffic ................................................ 32

Figure 23: Traffic Analysis Zones and External Gateways ..................... 33

Figure 24: Existing AM and PM Total Intersection Volumes ................. 35

Figure 25. Existing Intersection Peak Hour Volumes ............................ 36

Figure 26: Existing Intersection Peak Hour Volumes ............................ 37

Figure 27:Existing Intersection Peak Hour Volumes ............................. 38

Figure 28: Existing Freeway Peak Hour Volumes .................................. 39

Figure 29: AM Peak Period Travel Speed .............................................. 41

Figure 30: PM Peak Period Travel Speed .............................................. 42

Figure 31: Arlington Boulevard Peak Period Travel Speeds .................. 43

Figure 32: I-66 Peak Period Travel Speeds ............................................ 44

Figure 33: Existing Peak Hour Simulated Intersection Delay (VISSIM) . 47

Figure 34: Existing Peak Hour Simulated Intersection Delay (VISSIM)

continued .............................................................................................. 48

Figure 35: AM Peak Hour Cumulative Segment Delay per Vehicle ...... 50

Figure 36: PM Peak Hour Cumulative Segment Delay per Vehicle ....... 51

Figure 37: Existing Peak Hour Intersection Delay (Synchro) ................. 54

Figure 38: Parking and Curbspace Allocation ....................................... 56

Figure 39: Curbspace Distribution ........................................................ 57

Figure 40: Pervious Areas ..................................................................... 59

Figure 41: Street Landscaping ............................................................... 60

List of Tables Table 1: Performance Measures and MOEs ......................................... 14

Table 2: Bus Frequency and Service Types (Serving Core Area) ........... 19

Table 3: Transit Performance Measures ............................................... 20

Table 4: Pedestrian Performance Measures ......................................... 23

Table 5: Bicycle Performance Measures ............................................... 29

Table 6: Comparison of Origin and Destination Zone Trips based on

StreetLight Data .................................................................................... 34

Table 7: Existing Mode Share for MWCOG-Identified Trips of All

Purpose ................................................................................................. 34

Table 8: Cumulative Segment Peak Hour Delays per Vehicle ............... 49

Table 9: Critical Intersection VISSIM Approach Queues ....................... 52

Table 10: Level of Service (LOS) Criteria ............................................... 53

Table 11: Vehicle Measures .................................................................. 55

Table 12: Parking and Curbspace Performance Measures ................... 58

Table 13: Urban Design Performance Measures .................................. 61

Table 14: Performance Measures Summary ......................................... 65



Page 3 iii

List of Appendices Appendix A: Traffic Data

Appendix A-1: Traffic Counts

Appendix A-2: Travel Time Runs

Appendix A-3: Field Observations

Appendix B: Forecasting and Traffic Operations Analysis Framework Document

Appendix C: Travel Demand Model Validation and Data Collection Summary

Appendix D: Multimodal Measure of Effectiveness

Appendix E: VISSIM Model Calibration Summary

Appendix F: Synchro Model Measures of Effectiveness

Appendix G: VISSIM Model Measures of Effectiveness

Appendix H: Core Roslyn Reconfiguration Area Crash Statistics



Page 1 1

Introduction Among the many unique and vibrant neighborhoods in Arlington County, Rosslyn stands as a nexus of employment, community, and activity. It Is

both a gateway into and a focal point of Arlington County. The mix of residential areas, scenic open spaces and parks, and retail, office, and

other commercial uses makes Rosslyn a truly unique place to live, work, and play. This neighborhood character is the result of thoughtful and

deliberate planning to establish and achieve a vision of Rosslyn, as identified in the 1992 Rosslyn Station Area Plan Addendum:

• A proud gateway into Arlington and the Commonwealth of Virginia

• A vibrant place to live and work with ample opportunities for shopping, recreation, and cultural activities

• A home to the regional and national headquarters of major corporations and a premier office location in the country

• An example of superior architecture and urban design

• A place where people are comfortable with their surroundings and which serves as a great stage for human activities

Today, through years of strategic planning and redevelopment, the County is on track to realizing its vision for Rosslyn. In 2014, the County

launched the Realize Rosslyn community engagement effort which resulted in the Rosslyn Sector Plan. The Rosslyn Sector Plan identified a

strategy to address four areas for enhancement in Rosslyn:

• A better urban design framework to become a more attractive and functional place

• A more specific and deliberate building heights strategy to achieve various urban design and planning objectives

• A refined multimodal transportation system consistent with current Master Transportation Plan policies to support the enhanced

accessibility of Rosslyn’s residents, workers, and visitors

• A more cohesive and functional parks and open space network to meet the recreational needs of Rosslyn while enhancing its public

realm



Page 2 2

The Rosslyn Sector Plan established a new vision for Rosslyn, supported by six

vision principles as shown in Figure 1. Further, the Rosslyn Sector Plan

strategically outlined goals, policies, and recommendations for key plan focus

areas such as transportation; public parks and open space; building height and

form; and urban design, land use, and sustainability. The Rosslyn Sector Plan

concluded with a stage-setting summary of action items to be undertaken to

implement the plan’s recommendations and vision.

The Core of Rosslyn Transportation Study (the study) serves as a response to the

Rosslyn Sector Plan’s call to action. The study’s purpose is to synthesize the

transportation goals, polices, and recommendations of the Rosslyn Sector Plan

into a refined street configuration plan that considers the mobility and

connectivity of all modes. The study also serves as a vital reengagement of the

community to gather new ideas, to vet priorities and concepts, and to reaffirm

the vision of what Rosslyn’s street network can become. Lastly, the study is

oriented around implementation, providing a realistic vision of the future Rosslyn

street network, and defining the critical steps necessary to achieve that street

network.

The study goals are to:

• Develop sound analytical strategies to measure existing and future

multimodal transportation conditions and needs in the Rosslyn

neighborhood

• Effectively engage the public and stakeholders throughout the analysis

process

• Develop and evaluate a concept design for a street network to achieve

the Rosslyn Sector Plan’s goals, objectives, and recommendations

• Arrive at a final concept to move through the county’s design process

The Rosslyn Vision Statement

“ Rosslyn is Arlington’s world class downtown: the greatest concentration of jobs, housing, and activities in Arlington; an important gateway between Arlington and the Nation’s Capital; a preeminent destination with unparalleled views of and connections to Greater Washington; a vibrant and diverse community of people living, working, learning and playing together; a sustainable urban district that embraces its waterfront; a strong economic engine for the region and the commonwealth; the jewel of the Rosslyn-Ballston Corridor.”

VISION PRINCIPLES

1. Rosslyn will be a global destination with a dynamic skyline, unique vistas, and exceptional value.

2. Rosslyn will be accessible via exceptional transportation connections and choices.

3. Rosslyn will be a walkable neighborhood connecting people with community and choices.

4. Rosslyn will be a good neighbor to adjacent communities, making sensitive transitions of building form and offering complementary housing and service options.

5. Rosslyn will be an urban district that celebrates the experience of nature and recreation through its diverse network of public parks, open spaces, and tree-lined streets.

6. Rosslyn will be a dynamic place inspired by its diverse mix of people and activities.

Figure 1: Realize Rosslyn Vision Statement and Principles

Source: Rosslyn Sector Plan, 2015



Page 3 3

Previous Plans This study is informed, influenced, and enhanced by a long and rich history of strategic planning in Rosslyn and in Arlington County. Source

documents that were revisited throughout the development of this document include:

• Arlington County Master Transportation Plan

• Rosslyn Sector Plan: A Plan for the Rosslyn Coordinated Redevelopment District (Adopted July 2015)

• Rosslyn Briefing Book (2012)

• Rosslyn Multimodal Transportation Study (2012)

• Rosslyn Station Area Plan Addendum (1992)

• Rosslyn Transit Station Area Study (1977)

Existing Conditions Report Structure and Purpose The critical first step of the Core of Rosslyn Transportation Study is an assessment of the existing conditions, needs, challenges, and

opportunities with respect to transportation and mobility in Rosslyn. The existing conditions summary provides an analysis of the state of

transportation in Rosslyn.

The overview section provides a look at the configuration of the study area within the regional transportation network and introduces study

area-specific characteristics. The performance measures section describes the set of performance measures that were established to evaluate

conditions under potential alternatives. The sections that follow are organized by modal or other focus area. Each focus area provides tabular

and/or graphical summaries of relevant existing conditions performance measure.

Technical appendices contain detailed information regarding background data, model development, and model results.



Page 4 4

Overview

Regional Context Rosslyn is located at a key junction

of northern Virginia, situated in

Arlington’s Rosslyn-Ballston

corridor, adjacent to the Arlington’s

Route 1 corridor, and across the

Potomac River from the District of

Columbia (DC). Rosslyn has

connections to the region’s network

of interstates, major arterials,

transit routes, and regional trail

networks. The Key and Theodore

Roosevelt bridges, just outside the

study area, provide river crossing

connections for automobiles as well

as pedestrians and cyclists. The

Rosslyn Metrorail Station serves as

a major transfer point of the

Orange, Blue, and Silver Lines as

well as a multimodal destination for

commuter, local, and intercity

buses. Figure 2 shows the Rosslyn

study area within the regional

context.

Figure 2: Regional Context Map



Page 5 5

Study Area The overall boundaries for the study extend from N. Rhodes Street to N. Arlington Ridge Road and between Arlington Boulevard (Route 50) to

the George Washington Memorial Parkway/Francis Scott Key Bridge. The study area has been further stratified into sub-designations to meet

the needs of various technical analyses and to focus the most detailed analyses on the streets under consideration for reconfiguration. The study

area sub-designations are shown in Figure 3 and described below:

- Modeling Context Area – The is the broadest boundary for the study area which includes some of the regional connections and allows

the travel forecasting to factor in regional travel patterns and the implications of decisions on the larger network.

- Operational Analysis Area – Smaller than the Modeling Context Area, this is the area in which operational (traffic) analysis will be

conducted.

- Core Street Reconfiguration Area (or Core Area) – This is the concentrated area in which the street network reconfiguration alternatives

will be focused. This area will have the most detailed multimodal analysis.

- Critical Intersections – Within the Core Street Reconfiguration Area, pedestrian and bicycle operational data will be analyzed for this

subset of intersections.



Page 6 6

Figure 3: Study Area



Page 7 7

Street Network The Core Street Reconfiguration Area includes

and is proximate to facilities of regional and

local significance. Regional roadways include:

• I-66

• Lee Highway (US Route 29)

• Arlington Boulevard (US Route 50)

• George Washington Memorial Parkway

• State Route 110

Fort Myer Drive and N. Lynn Street are one-

way north-south principal arterials. Wilson

Boulevard and Clarendon Boulevard are east-

west principal arterials, serving as a one-way

pair west of Fort Myer Drive. These streets

are complemented by a network of minor

arterials and local streets.

N. Moore Street is a recently reconstructed

street that operates one-way, southbound,

and provides access to bus bays serving the

Rosslyn Metrorail Station.

Figure 4 shows the functional classification

and directionality (one-way or two-way) of

the street network.

Figure 4: Street Network



Page 8 8

Regional Commuting Patterns In 2015, Rosslyn was home to over 13,300 residents and

29,700 employees1.

The OnTheMap online GIS portal from US Census

Longitudinal Employer-Household Dynamics (LEHD)

Origin Destination Employment Statistics (LODES)2 was

used to determine the work trip flow patterns in and

out of the Modeling Context Area (see Figure 5 and

Figure 6). Some highlights include:

• Approximately 400 people live and work in the

zip codes contained in the Modeling Context

Area.

• The number of inflow commute trips to the

Rosslyn study area is approximately 3.5 times

that of the outflow commute trips. • Rosslyn residents that commute from the

Modeling Context Area have common work

destinations that include Tysons, McLean, and

downtown DC.

1 Source: Arlington County, CPHD, Planning Division, Center for Urban Design and Research, December 2017. 2 Source: US Census Longitudinal Employer-Household Dynamics (LEHD) Origin Destination Employment Statistics (LODES) 2015 Employment Data. Note that some Federal jobs are not included in this data set due to security concerns.

Figure 5: Commute Trips from Rosslyn

Source: LODES 2015 Employment Data



Page 9 9

• Many Rosslyn employees, i.e. commuters to the

Modeling Context Area

o Live along the I-66 corridor or in South Arlington

o Travel from a wide variety of locations around the

region – the 25 zip codes that produce the most trips

to the study area only comprise approximately one-

third of the total work trips

Figure 73 shows travel patterns in and out of the Modeling

Context Area. The blue arrows depict vehicular travel

patterns during the PM peak. The most significant gateways

for incoming and outgoing traffic are the Theodore Roosevelt

Bridge (via I-66) to the east and the George Washington

Memorial Parkway to the northwest. Approximately 80

percent of peak period vehicle trips, i.e. trips occurring during

the work commute, move through, and do not stop in

Rosslyn4. The high magnitude of through trips is due in part

to the location of Rosslyn at the junction of several major

highway facilities that connect the entire DC region. These

through trips also represent a key opportunity for the

visibility and economic growth of Rosslyn.

Destination data for daily Metrorail trips originating at the

Rosslyn station5 shows that approximately two-thirds of these

Metrorail trips are destined for DC and Maryland. The

remainder of the trips are split between destinations to the

west (via the Orange or Silver Lines) or to the south (Blue and

Yellow Lines).

3 Source: June 2014 – Nov 2017 traffic counts. 4 Source: StreetLight origin-destination data, July – August 2017 5 Source: WMATA, October 2015

Figure 6: Commute Trips To Rosslyn

Source: LODES 2015 Employment Data



Page 10 10

Figure 7: Study Area Travel Patterns

Sources: June 2014 – Nov 2017 traffic counts; StreetLight origin-destination data, July – August 2017; WMATA, October 2015



Page 11 11

Mode Share

Rosslyn Residents: Commute Trips from Rosslyn

Study Area The American Community Survey (ACS) synthesizes

commute data for communities across the United

States. For the two census tracts that generally make

up the Modeling Context Area, ACS estimates that

approximately 47 percent of all commute trips taken

by study area residents are via public transportation,

as shown in Figure 8, and approximately one-third of

residents drive to work alone. For comparison,

residents of Arlington County overall report

approximately 26 percent of commute trips via public

transportation. This high share of transit commuting

emphasizes the importance of WMATA, ART, and

other transit functionality and connectivity in the

Rosslyn neighborhood.

Active transportation (walking and biking) trips make

up an additional 10 percent of study area residents’

work trips. This is about three percent greater than

the overall County proportion (less than 7 percent).

Drove alone36%

Carpooled4%

Public Transportation

47%

Walked8%

Bicycle2%

Taxicab, motorcycle, or other means

<1%

Worked at home

3%

Figure 8: Mode Share of Workers from Rosslyn Study Area

Source: American Community Survey Data (2011-2015 5-Year Averages) for two census tracts generally representing Modeling Context Area



Page 12 12

Rosslyn Employees: Commute Trips to

Rosslyn Study Area The Arlington County Office Building Study

(2015-2016) surveyed 15 buildings on the

Rosslyn-Clarendon-Ballston Corridor, of

which four buildings are in Modeling Context

Area. The survey provides a perspective of

the mode shares for Rosslyn employees that

is comparable and similar to the regional

travel demand model and national (census)

estimates.

As shown in Figure 9, the study found that

41 percent of all AM commute trips for

Rosslyn employees are via public

transportation, comparable to the

percentage of drive-alone trips.

This survey is based on a relatively small

sample of employees (638) compared to the

total workforce (approximately 30,000

employees) in the Rosslyn study area, but

this data found to be reasonably

representative of travel patterns for the

purposes of this study. Still, it demonstrates

that public transportation is a vital mode for

commuters to Rosslyn.

Figure 9: Mode Share of Commute Trips to Rosslyn Study Area

Source: Arlington County Building Survey (2016) for buildings in the Rosslyn Study Area Note: CWS is compressed work schedule

54%

30%

10%7% 6%

53%

30%

9% 8%4%

43% 41%

10%6%

3%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Drive Alone Transit Bike/Walk Carpool/Vanpool Telework/CWS

Per

cen

tage

of

Res

po

nd

ents

Ballston Clarendon Rosslyn



Page 13 13

Performance Measures Performance measures were developed to evaluate potential street reconfiguration alternatives with respect to the transportation goals of the

Rosslyn Sector Plan and the Master Transportation Plan. Performance measures are organized by mode or focus area. Each performance

measure considers several individual measures of effectiveness (MOEs), both quantitative and qualitative. Performance evaluation is focused on

a comparative assessment between the future no-build conditions and the alternatives and differences between the alternatives themselves.

The overarching goal of performance evaluation is to identify the tradeoffs between modes and arrive at a preferred alternative. Performance

measures and MOEs are shown in Table 1. Different geographic focuses (as described in the Study Area section of this report) are considered

for different MOEs. It is noted that some MOEs do not apply to existing conditions.



Page 14 14

Table 1: Performance Measures and MOEs

Mode / Element Performance Measures Measures of Effectiveness

Transit • Accessibility of bus and rail transit

• Transit operation

a. Quantity of Transit Person Trips b. Quantity of Bus Stop Locations c. Quality of Bus Stop Facilities d. Transit Average Speed

Pedestrian • Pedestrian experience and comfort

• Street crossing experience

a. Quantity of Pedestrian Person Trips b. Pedestrian Experience and Comfort c. Quantity of Enhanced Crosswalks / Pedestrian Crossing Times d. Pedestrian Delay (seconds) at Critical Intersections

Bicycle • Connectivity of bicycle facilities to trail network

• Provision of dedicated bicycle facilities

a. Quantity of Bicycle Person Trips b. Bicycle Network Connections to Local/Regional Trails c. Quantity of New or Improved Dedicated Bicycle Facilities d. Bicycle Delay (seconds) at Critical Intersections

Vehicles • Vehicle delay and queuing at critical intersections

• Travel time

a. Quantity of Vehicular Person Trips b. Queues at Critical Intersections c. Overall Vehicle Delay at Intersections d. Peak Period Travel Time/Speed

Parking & Curbspace

• Public parking (on- and off-street)

• Curbside management

a. Quantity of On-Street Parking Supply b. Quantity of New Multimodal Curb Space

Urban Design

• Green infrastructure (such as landscaping, permeable pavements, street trees, etc.)

• Streetscape elements (benches, decorative walls, sitting areas, wider sidewalks, bicycle racks, pocket parks, etc.)

• Improved access to public spaces

a. Percentage of Impervious Area b. Percentage of Street Tree Coverage/Landscaping

Economic Development

Qualitative analysis of how all transportation changes will affect economic activity and growth potential

Implementation • Project costs and right-of-way (ROW) needs

• Desired implementation schedule

a. Costs/Benefit Assessment b. Impacts to Existing ROW and Property Owners c. Implementation Timeline (Years) d. Days of Construction (Months)



Page 15 15

Transit The Rosslyn transit network includes Metrorail service, local bus service (Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority [WMATA] Metrobus, Arlington Transit [ART], and DC Circulator), commuter bus service (Loudoun County Transit [LCT], Potomac and Rappahannock Transportation Commission [PRTC]), intercity bus, and private shuttles. The sections below discuss transit infrastructure, such as the stops and stations, and the service characteristics.

Infrastructure Within the Core Street Reconfiguration Area, there are 12

bus stops, one Metrorail station with three entrances, and

three Capital Bikeshare locations as shown in Figure 10.

Capital Bikeshare is discussed further in the Bicycle section

of this report.

Recent improvements at the Rosslyn Metrorail Station

included a new entrance to the station with three high

speed elevators. The Metrorail station improvements also

added new bus stop infrastructure with saw tooth bays

along N. Moore Street, shelters, benches, real-time

information screens, and other amenities.

A transit bus tunnel linking N. Lynn Street and N. Moore

Street will soon reduce bus travel times in the area.

There are two metered bus parking locations in the

Rosslyn study area. One is on the NB side of Fort Myer

Drive between 19th St N and Lee Highway EB. The other is

located on N Arlington Ridge Road between 19th St N and

Wilson Blvd. These are common parking locations for tour

and intercity buses when not in operation.

Figure 10: Transit Infrastructure



Page 16 16

Service Metrorail and bus transit serve Rosslyn on weekdays and

weekends.

Metrorail Metrorail’s Orange, Silver, and Blue Lines serve the

Rosslyn Metrorail Station. It is the major transfer point

and the first/last station in the Commonwealth of

Virginia for these lines. During peak periods, the

Metrorail tunnel between Rosslyn and Foggy Bottom

carries trains at its capacity, approximately one train

every two minutes.

Metrorail operates between 5:00 AM and 11:30 PM,

Monday through Thursday with weekend hours

beginning slightly later and ending slightly later (5:00

AM-1:00 AM Friday, 7:00 AM-1:00 AM Saturday, 8:00

AM-11:00 PM Sunday).

Ridership

Rosslyn is the 11th busiest station in the Metrorail system

and 2nd busiest station in Virginia6 by ridership, averaging

approximately 12,400 daily boardings and 11,600 daily

alightings (based on Fiscal Year 2017 data). Figure 11

shows the boardings and alightings at the Rosslyn

Metrorail by time period.

6 Rosslyn is second in Virginia to the Pentagon Metrorail station.

3,7754,509

2,4752,078

5,0863,529

1,044

1,490

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000

12,000

14,000

Boardings (Entry) Alightings (Exit)

Ave

rage

Wee

kday

Rid

ers

AM PEAK MIDDAY PM PEAK EVENING

Figure 11: Average Weekday Metrorail Ridership – Rosslyn

Source: WMATA Average Weekday FY 17 passenger boardings.



Page 17 17

Bus Service

Local Bus

The Core Street Reconfiguration Area and,

specifically, the Metrorail station serve as a

major transfer point for bus and rail service.

Figure 12 shows local routes from three

different bus service providers with service

that stops within the Core Street

Reconfiguration Area.

Current Metrobus routes include the 3Y 4A,

4B, 5A, 10E, 15K, and 38B.

Current local ART routes include ART 43, 45,

55, 61A, and 61B.

The DC Circulator Rosslyn-Ballston route also

serves the study area.

In addition to public transit local bus,

shuttlebus, and motorcoach service is also

provided by private operators, such as

Georgetown University Transportation Shuttle

(GUTS).

Figure 12: Local Bus Routes



Page 18 18

Commuter Bus

Figure 13 shows commuter and airport express

routes that stop in the study area. Rosslyn is served

by commuter bus service from Loudoun County and

Prince William County. Four commuter stops are

located in or within a block of the Core Street

reconfiguration area, and many commuter routes

continue into DC or destinations in Northern

Virginia after stopping in Rosslyn. It is noted that

additional bus routes are provided along I-66 and

Route 110. However, because these routes do not

stop within Rosslyn they are not depicted.

Figure 13: Commuter Bus Routes



Page 19 19

Operations and Ridership

Table 2 shows operational characteristics and average annual line ridership for all routes that serve the Core Street Reconfiguration Area,

including frequency and service types.

Table 2: Bus Frequency and Service Types (Serving Core Area)

Bus Route Service Type Approximate AM

Peak Headway (minutes)

Approximate PM Peak Headway

(minutes)

Serve Rosslyn Metrorail Station?

Weekend Service?

Average Annual Total

Weekday Daily Boarding7

ART 43 Local 10 10 No Yes 269,450

ART 45 Local 25-30 25-30 Yes Yes 317,210

ART 55 Local 12 12-15 No No 398,120

ART 61A Clockwise Local 25 25 Yes No 36,190

ART 61B Counter Clockwise Local 25 25 Yes No

DC Circulator Dupont-Rosslyn Local 10 10 Yes Yes 1,070,0008

Metrobus Route 3Y Local 10-30 25 No No 121,320

Metrobus Route 4A Local 30 15-30 Yes No 404, 250

Metrobus Route 4B Local 30 30 Yes Yes 404,250

Metrobus Route 5A Airport Express 30-35 35-40 Yes Yes 232,570

Metrobus Route 10 E Local 15-20 20-30 Yes No 521,640

Metrobus Route 15K Local One Westbound AM trip only (5:40am) Yes No 109,420

Metrobus Route 38B Major 10-25 15-30 No Yes 917,840

Loudoun Dulles to Arlington/DC Commuter 10 Does not stop in

core area No No Not available

Loudoun Purcellville/Leesburg to Arlington/DC

Commuter 15 Does not stop in

core area No No Not available

PRTC Dale City Commuter 30 30 No No Not available

7 Sources: ART – FY 2017 Data provided by ART; Metrobus - FY 2016 Data (http://www.novatransit.org/uploads/data/fulldatasets/NVTCFullDataSetFY16.pdf); DC Circulator – FY 2016 Data (http://www.dccirculator.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/DC-Circulator-2017-TDP-Update.pdf) 8 DC Circulator ridership includes weekend ridership


http://www.novatransit.org/uploads/data/fulldatasets/NVTCFullDataSetFY16.pdf

http://www.dccirculator.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/DC-Circulator-2017-TDP-Update.pdf


Page 20 20

Existing Condition Transit Measures Table 3 summarizes existing metrics for the transit performance measures considered in this study.

Table 3: Transit Performance Measures

Measure of Effectiveness Evaluation Metric Existing Condition

Quantity of Transit Person Trips The quantity of new transit person trips related to each study alternatives will be compared under future conditions.

Quantity of Bus Stop Locations Number of existing stops in Core Street Reconfiguration Area

15 bus stops

Quality of Bus Stop Facilities The number of recommended improved shelters or other amenities in each study alternatives will be compared under future conditions.

Transit Average Speed9 Average travel speed for representative bus routes between entry and exit points to the modeled network

AM: 6.0 mph PM: 11.2 mph

9 Source: Project VISSIM model. Transit travel times were collected from the project VISSIM model and describe the total time it takes for each route to enter

the study area, travel along its route, stop where designated, and then exit the study area. The average travel speed for these segments is presented in the table for summary purposes. Appendix D: Figure 1 illustrates the start and end points of the transit travel time routes for representative routes and Appendix D: Table 1 shows the travel times for representative routes.



Page 21 21

Pedestrians

Network The sidewalk, crosswalk, and trail network in the Core Street Reconfiguration Area represent the main components of the Rosslyn pedestrian network. There are almost three acres of sidewalk within the public right-of-way. Block lengths, especially between 19th Street N. and Wilson Boulevard are long (approximately 650 to 700 feet) considering the urban characteristic of the study area. For comparison, some peer neighborhoods have block lengths ranging from 300 to 400 feet. Some sidewalks parallel blank walls or cross broad service entrances, legacies of when Rosslyn was planned with skywalks to accommodate pedestrian circulation separated in grade from vehicles. Of the skywalk segments that remain, the most well-used segment is between the Metrorail station and Oak Street. East-west streets such as Wilson Boulevard and 17th Street N., although connected by ramps or service roads, are generally at a higher elevation than the north-south streets. Figure 14 shows the pedestrian network.

Figure 14: Pedestrian Network

Source: Rosslyn Sector Plan, July 2015



Page 22 22

Usage Figure 15 shows average daily pedestrian counts from Arlington County’s count stations and PM peak hour counts at critical intersections. The most significant pedestrian volumes are seen along 19th Street N. and Wilson Boulevard during the PM peak hour. This significant pedestrian volumes in the Core Street Reconfiguration Area are also located at intersections that also have significant traffic, transit, and bicycle congestion. The combination of these competing uses decreases the amount of available green time for pedestrian crossings. Based on a review of crossing distances, and based on estimated walking speeds of three feet per second, the following legs of critical intersections do have provide sufficient crossing times coded in their signal timing:

• North and south legs of N. Lynn Street & eastbound Lee Highway

• South and east legs of N. Lynn Street and Wilson Boulevard

• North and south legs of N. Fort Myer Drive and Wilson Boulevard

• West leg of N. Oak Street and Clarendon Boulevard

A summary table of pedestrian crossing distances and pedestrian signal timing is included in Appendix D.

Figure 15: Pedestrian Network Usage



Page 23 23

Existing Condition Pedestrian Measures Table 4 summarizes evaluation metrics for the pedestrian performance measures.

Table 4: Pedestrian Performance Measures


Quantity of Pedestrian Person Trips

The quantity of new pedestrian person trips related to each study alternatives will be compared under future conditions.

Pedestrian Experience and Comfort

Area of sidewalk in the public right-of-way (Core Street Reconfiguration Area)

126,400 square feet (Approximately 2.9 acres) of sidewalk

Quantity of Enhanced Crosswalks

The number of new or enhanced pedestrian crossings provided by each study alternative will be compared under future conditions.

Pedestrian Delay10 at Critical Intersections

Number of intersections with 40 or more seconds of pedestrian delay (LOS E or F)

AM: 2 out of 13 intersections PM: 5 out of 13 intersections

Pedestrian Crossing Times Number of crossings where pedestrian crossing time is not sufficient for the crossing distance

7 out of 47 crossings lacking sufficient crossing times:

• North and south legs of N. Lynn Street & eastbound Lee Highway

• South and east legs of N. Lynn Street and Wilson Boulevard

• North and south legs of N. Fort Myer Drive and Wilson Boulevard

• West leg of N. Oak Street and Clarendon Boulevard

10 Source: Project VISSIM model. The project VISSIM model was used to simulate pedestrian crossings at study area intersections. The average pedestrian delay

waiting to cross an intersection can be related to a level of service threshold based on the methodology of the 2000 Edition of the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM 2000) as shown in Appendix D: Table 1. This threshold indicates the likelihood of a pedestrian not complying with the “WALK” and “DON’T WALK” traffic indications based on the amount of time that they are delayed in crossing the intersection.



Page 24 24

Figure 16: Existing Peak Hour Simulated Intersection Pedestrian Delay (VISSIM)

Source: Project VISSIM Model

LEGEND

AM l PM Peak Hour LOS

LOS A LOS B

LOS C

LOS D LOS E LOS F

XX (XX) AM(PM) Delay



Page 25 25

Bicycles

Network Rosslyn is near regional

trails such as the Custis

Trail, the Mt. Vernon Trail,

the Arlington Boulevard

Trail, and bridge crossings

on the Key Bride and

Theodore Roosevelt

Bridge. Figure 17 shows

the bike network in the

study area and the Capital

Bikeshare Stations.

On-street bike lanes within

the Core Street

Reconfiguration Area are

present on N. Lynn Street

(northbound only) from

Fairfax Drive to US Route

29 eastbound. N. Lynn

Street is the only street

with marked bike lanes

within the core street

reconfiguration area and

the bike lane is often blocked

by idle vehicles. Protected bicycle lanes have been recently added along Wilson Boulevard west of the Core Street Reconfiguration Area and will

ultimately connect the Courthouse neighborhood to the Custis Trail by the end of 2018. While additional streets are designated as “On-Street

Bicycle Routes” by Arlington County (Fort Myer Drive and Nash Street), there are many gaps within the Core Street Reconfiguration Area.

Figure 17: Bike Network



Page 26 26

Within the Modelling Context Area there are four

connection points to major trails and to the

“Arlington Loop,” a combination of 16.5 miles of bike

trails that encircles much of Arlington County:

• N. Scott Street bike lane connects to Custis Trail

• N. Lynn Street bike lane connects to Custis

Trail/Mt. Vernon Trail

• N. Rhodes Street bike lane connects to

Arlington Boulevard Trail

• N. Meade Street bike lane connects to

Arlington Cemetery trail network

The first two connections occur at intersections with

high vehicular volumes.

Usage Figure 18 shows average daily counts from Arlington

County’s count stations and PM peak hour counts at

critical intersections. The segment of the Custis Trail

along US Route 29 has among the highest bicycle

volumes in the County. The N. Lynn Street and the

Custis Trail intersection has been identified as a

bicycle safety hotspot. There is low bicycle ridership

in the core street reconfiguration area compared to

surrounding trails, which may be related to fewer

dedicated bike facilities in the core. The boardings

and alightings at each Capital Bikeshare station varies

(see Figure 19), but at all stations internal trips

represent approximately 10 percent of the trips taken

for FY 2016 and FY 2017. Approximately 64,300 trips

began or ended at the three stations within the Core

Street Reconfiguration Area in 2017.

Figure 18: Bike Network Usage

Sources: FY 2017 Capital Bikeshare Data; Arlington County permanent count stations; June 2014 – Nov 2017 traffic counts



Page 27 27

Figure 19: Bikeshare Trips per Quarter Year in Rosslyn

Source: FY 2017 Capital Bikeshare Data

12,709

26,21729,102

19,09315,981

30,43032,628

20,501

1,578

2,904

3,056

2,207

2,015

3,419

3,702

2,103

0

5,000

10,000

15,000

20,000

25,000

30,000

35,000

40,000

2016 Q1 2016 Q2 2016 Q3 2016 Q4 2017 Q1 2017 Q2 2017 Q3 2017 Q4

Nu

mb

er o

f B

ikes

har

e Tr

ips

Trips Beginning or Ending Outside Study Area Internal Trips



Page 28 28

Bicycle Level of Traffic Stress To understand the perceived comfort for bicyclists in

the Core Street Reconfiguration Area, the streets

were assessed with a methodology called Bicycle

Level of Traffic Stress (BLTS). BLTS is scored from one

to four (one representing low stress for a bicyclist and

four representing high stress for a bicyclist), based on

factors such as bicycle facility type, traffic speed,

street width, and bike lane width. The combination of

these factors contributes to the level of stress that a

bicyclist may feel as they travel along a roadway

segment.

A street with a BLTS score of one provides

comfortable and a low stress riding experience for

bicyclists of all ages and abilities. The methodology

was developed by the Mineta Transportation Institute

in 2012 and updated in June 201711. Figure 20 shows

the resulting LTS for streets in the Core Street

Reconfiguration Area. Much of the Core Street

Reconfiguration Area is identified as BLTS 3. Even in

areas where a bike lane is present, the combination of

street width, traffic volumes, and on-street parking

contribute to a higher stress environment. Streets

with an adjacent trail are rated as BLTS 1, assuming

the bicyclist uses the trail parallel to the roadway. The

findings are generally consistent with Arlington

County’s 2018 “Bicycle Comfort Level Map12”.

11 More information can be found here: http://www.northeastern.edu/peter.furth/research/level-of-traffic-stress/ (introduction) and here: http://www.northeastern.edu/peter.furth/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/LTS-Tables-v2-June-1.pdf (updated methodology) 12 http://www.bikearlington.com/maps-and-routes/

Figure 20: Bike Level of Traffic Stress


http://www.northeastern.edu/peter.furth/research/level-of-traffic-stress/

http://www.northeastern.edu/peter.furth/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/LTS-Tables-v2-June-1.pdf


Page 29 29

Existing Condition Bicycle Measures Table 5 summarizes evaluation metrics for the bicycle performance measures.

Table 5: Bicycle Performance Measures


Quantity of Bicycle Person Trips

For each of the potential street reconfiguration alternatives, the quantity of transit person trips will be measured to compare between alternatives.

Bicycle Network Connections to Local/Regional Trails

Number of connection points in the modeling context area to major trails (Custis Trail, Mount Vernon Trail, and Arlington Boulevard Trail)

4 – N. Scott Street, N. Lynn Street, N. Meade Street, Arlington Boulevard bike lanes

Quantity of New or Improved Dedicated Bicycle Facilities

Existing bicycle level of traffic stress segments (Core Street Reconfiguration Area)

Distributions of level of stress by directional street centerline mileage:

• BLTS 1: 6%

• BLTS 2: 8%

• BLTS 3: 85%

• BLTS 4: 1%

Bicycle Delay13 at Critical Intersections

Number of critical intersections with 40 or more seconds of bicycle delay (LOS E or F)


13 Source: Project VISSIM model. The project VISSIM model was used to simulate bicycle movements along study area streets. The average bicycle delay at

each critical intersection was collected as shown below. HCM 2000 provides a methodology for relating bicycle delays at signalized intersections to level of

service as shown in Appendix D: Table 2.



Page 30 30

Figure 21 Existing Peak Hour Simulated Intersection Bicycle Delay (VISSIM)


LEGEND


LOS A LOS B

LOS C

LOS D LOS E LOS F




Page 31 31

Vehicles

Traffic Volume and Travel Patterns The existing traffic volume and travel patterns in Rosslyn were identified based on annual average daily traffic (AADT) volumes as estimated by

the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) and the District Department of Transportation (DDOT), GPS-based StreetLight origin-

destination data, Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments’ (MWCOG) Region Travel Demand model, and traffic counts taken by the

County at intersections and streets. Additional details on how the travel demand model was validated for use in this study and details on the

data sources for this study are included in Appendix C.

VDOT and DDOT each maintain permanent count stations along major roads to monitor the patterns and levels of daily traffic. The counts are

summarized into annual reports. The most recent reports, containing years 2015 and 2016 data were reviewed to determine the typical

weekday daily traffic volumes along study area streets, as shown in Figure 22.

StreetLight Data is an online data metrics tool that enables analysis of anonymized transportation data collected from mobile devices with active

global positioning system (GPS) signals. Origin-destination travel patterns for auto trips were was developed based on traffic analysis zones

(TAZs) within the Rosslyn study area and external gateways into and out of the Rosslyn study area (such as I-66/US 29, Arlington Boulevard,

Route 110, Key Bridge, George Washington Memorial Parkway, and the Theodore Roosevelt Bridge). The five MWCOG TAZs that make up the

Rosslyn Study area were disaggregated based census block groups, socioeconomic data (such as population and employments), the existing

roadway network, and parking access. The resulting TAZs are shown in Figure 23. The purpose of disaggregating the TAZs was to provide more

realistic modeling of travel patterns and to represent travel flows to and from major developments or parking garages.

A year of weekday data, between July 2016 and August 2017, was analyzed and used to develop study area trip patterns during the AM and PM

commuter peak periods of travel shown in Table 6 . The AM peak period represents a three-hour period from 6:00 AM to 9:00 AM while the PM

peak period represents a four-hour period from 3:00 PM to 7:00 PM14. This data indicates that there are a significant number of vehicular trips

(approximately 80 percent) that travel through Rosslyn during peak periods, with neither an origin or destination in the Rosslyn area.

14 Peak periods consistent with MWCOG regional travel demand model



Page 32 32

Figure 22: Annual Average Daily Traffic

Sources: VDOT Traffic Engineering Division Annual Average Daily Traffic Volume Estimates by Section of Route, Arlington Maintenance Area (2016); DDOT 2015 Traffic Volumes Map



Page 33 33

Figure 23: Traffic Analysis Zones and External Gateways

Source: MWCOG Travel Demand Model (Edited)



Page 34 34

Table 6: Comparison of Origin and Destination Zone Trips based on StreetLight Data

Zone

% of Overall Network Trips Traveling To/From/Within/Through the Study Area

Origin Zone Trips Destination Zone Trips

AM Peak Period PM Peak Period AM Peak Period PM Peak Period

Arlington Core, west of Rosslyn 4% (2,800) 3% (3,000) 2% (1,400) 3% (3,000)

I-66/US 29, west of Rosslyn 19% (13,200) 12% (12,000) 9% (6,300) 13% (12,900)

George Washington Memorial Parkway, north of Rosslyn 21% (14,600) 13% (13,000) 13% (9,100) 23% (22,800)

Key Bridge (US 29) 9% (6,200) 10% (10,000) 13% (9,100) 10% (9,900)

Theodore Roosevelt Bridge (I-66, US 50) 7% (4,900) 24% (23,900) 26% (18,100) 13% (12,900)

George Washington Memorial Parkway, south of Rosslyn 10% (6,900) 11% (11,000) 13% (9,100) 10% (9,900)

Route 110 9% (6,200) 7% (7,000) 5% (3,5000) 9% (8,900)

Arlington Boulevard (US 50), west of Rosslyn 11% (7,600) 5% (5,000) 4% (2,800) 10% (9,900)

Rosslyn Study Area* 10% (6,900) 15% (14,830) 15% (10,340) 9% (9,060)

Overall 100% (69,300) 100% (99,730) 100% (69,740) 100% (99,260)

Percent (Estimated Number of Trips based on traffic counts) Source: June 2014 – Nov 2017; Streetlight Data: July 2016 – August 2017. *Traffic counts of trips originating in or destined to Rosslyn Study Area were estimated as the total traffic volume entering or exiting garages

The MWCOG regional travel demand model forecasts current and future

travel patterns based on current and future land uses, employment, and

population projections provided by regional municipalities and jurisdictions.

As shown in Table 7, the MWCOG regional travel demand model suggests that

auto trips make up 52 and 51 percent of all daily trips from and to Rosslyn,

respectively.

Mode Mode Share

From Rosslyn Mode Share To Rosslyn

Auto 52% 51%

Transit 18% 26%

Non-motorized 29% 23%

Table 7: Existing Mode Share for MWCOG-Identified Trips of All Purpose



Page 35 35

Peak period traffic counts were reviewed at the 55 intersections (29 signalized, 26 unsignalized) in the Rosslyn study area. The buildup and

dissipation of traffic during the peak periods is visually represented in Figure 24. The network peak hours of traffic, identified as the continuous

60-minute interval when the most vehicles are present along the N. Lynn Street and N. Fort Myer Drive corridors, were observed to be 8:00 AM

to 9:00 AM for the morning peak and 5:00 PM to 6:00 PM for the afternoon/evening peak. Figure 25, Figure 26, and Figure 27show the peak

hour traffic volumes at study area intersections. Freeway peak hour traffic volumes in and around Rosslyn are shown in Figure 28.

Figure 24: Existing AM and PM Total Intersection Volumes

Source: June 2014 – Nov 2017 traffic counts



Page 36 36

Figure 25. Existing Intersection Peak Hour Volumes




Page 37 37

Figure 26: Existing Intersection Peak Hour Volumes




Page 38 38

Figure 27:Existing Intersection Peak Hour Volumes




Page 39 39

Figure 28: Existing Freeway Peak Hour Volumes

Source: VDOT Traffic Engineering Division Annual Average Daily Traffic Volume Estimates by Section of Route, Arlington Maintenance Area (2016)



Page 40

Travel Time and Speed Travel time was field-measured along six critical segments in the Rosslyn Study area:

• Northbound N. Lynn Street (Arlington Boulevard to George Washington Memorial Parkway)

• Southbound Fort Myer Drive (George Washington Memorial Parkway to Arlington Boulevard)

• Eastbound Clarendon Boulevard (N. Rhodes Street to N. Arlington Ridge Road)

• Westbound Wilson Boulevard (N. Arlington Ridge Road to N. Oak Street)

• Eastbound 19th Street N. (Key Boulevard to N. Kent Street)

• Westbound 19th Street N. (N. Kent Street to Key Boulevard)

Representative average peak period travel speeds, based on the travel time measurements, are shown in Figure 29 and Figure 30.

Speed data was also obtained using INRIX data, collected from Regional Integrated Transportation Information System (RITIS), for freeway

segments on I-66 and Arlington Boulevard. Figure 31 and Figure 32 demonstrates travel speeds along these two corridors during the peak

period.

▪ Congested segments in the AM peak period:

o I-66 eastbound operates at speeds less than 20 mph for most of the morning peak (45 percent of posted speed)

o Arlington Boulevard eastbound operates at speeds less than 20 mph for most morning (18 percent of posted speed)

o N. Lynn Street from Georgetown to Route 50 (17 to 27 percent of posted speed, by segment)

o Clarendon Boulevard eastbound from N. Rhodes Street to N. Oak Street (30 percent of posted speed)

▪ Congested segments the PM peak period:

o I-66 eastbound is congested between N. Lynn Street and DC (40 percent of posted speed)

o Arlington Boulevard eastbound is less congested and operates at moderate speeds (51 percent of posted speed)



Page 41

Figure 29: AM Peak Period Travel Speed

Sources: Travel time runs (2017); Google Maps Application Programming Interfaces (API)



Page 42

Figure 30: PM Peak Period Travel Speed

Source: Travel time runs (2017); Google Maps Application Programming Interfaces (API)



Page 43

Figure 31: Arlington Boulevard Peak Period Travel Speeds

Source: RITIS

4:30 PM 4:30 PM

5:00 PM 5:00 PM

5:30 PM 5:30 PM

6:00 PM 6:00 PM

6:30 PM 6:30 PM

7:00 PM 7:00 PM

7:30 PM 7:30 PM

OB

SE

RV

ED

SP

EE

D

OB

SE

RV

ED

SP

EE

D

Westbound Arlington BlvdEastbound Arlington Blvd

Ro

ose

velt

Bri

dg

e

N M

ead

eS

tree

t

N R

ho

des

Str

eet

Ro

ose

velt

Bri

dg

e

N M

ead

eS

tree

t

N R

ho

des

Str

eet

0

Average Speed (mph)

7050 6040302010

7:30 AM 7:30 AM

8:00 AM 8:00 AM

8:30 AM 8:30 AM

9:00 AM 9:00 AM

9:30 AM 9:30 AM

10:00 AM 10:00 AM

10:30 AM 10:30 AM

OB

SE

RV

ED

SP

EE

D

OB

SE

RV

ED

SP

EE

D

Eastbound Arlington Blvd Westbound Arlington Blvd

Ro

ose

velt

Bri

dg

e

N M

ead

eS

tree

t

N R

ho

des

Str

eet

Ro

ose

velt

Bri

dg

e

N M

ead

eS

tree

t

N R

ho

des

Str

eet

0

Average Speed (mph)

7050 6040302010



Page 44

4:30 PM 4:30 PM

5:00 PM 5:00 PM

5:30 PM 5:30 PM

6:00 PM 6:00 PM

6:30 PM 6:30 PM

7:00 PM 7:00 PM

7:30 PM 7:30 PM

Westbound I-66Eastbound I-66

OB

SE

RV

ED

SP

EE

D

OB

SE

RV

ED

SP

EE

D

D.C

.

Ro

ute

110

US

50 R

amp

N S

cott

Str

eet

N L

ynn

Str

eet

D.C

.

Ro

ute

110

US

50 R

amp

N S

cott

Str

eet

N L

ynn

Str

eet

0

Average Speed (mph)

7050 6040302010 0

Average Speed (mph)

7050 6040302010

7:30 AM 7:30 AM

8:00 AM 8:00 AM

8:30 AM 8:30 AM

9:00 AM 9:00 AM

9:30 AM 9:30 AM

10:00 AM 10:00 AM

10:30 AM 10:30 AM

Westbound I-66Eastbound I-66

OB

SE

RV

ED

SP

EE

D

OB

SE

RV

ED

SP

EE

D

D.C

.

Ro

ute

110

US

50 R

amp

N S

cott

Str

eet

N L

ynn

Str

eet

D.C

.

Ro

ute

110

US

50 R

amp

N S

cott

Str

eet

N L

ynn

Str

eet

0

Average Speed (mph)

7050 6040302010 0

Average Speed (mph)

7050 6040302010

Figure 32: I-66 Peak Period Travel Speeds

Source: RITIS



Page 45

Vehicle Traffic Operations Analysis Traffic operations analyses were conducted to identify the current performance of Rosslyn streets and intersections under the existing traffic

conditions. For study intersections and road segments east of N. Oak Street, particularly those in the Core Street Reconfiguration Area, as well as

the freeway network, a microscopic evaluation was conducted using PTV VISUM (Version 16) and VISSIM (Version 9.0, Build 10) software. For

study intersections west of N. Oak Street, a macroscopic evaluation was conducted using Synchro (Version 9) software.

VISSIM Analysis Results VISSIM, a microscopic traffic simulation and evaluation tool, was used to analyze peak period traffic conditions at the study intersections and

ramps within the Core Street Reconfiguration Area. The benefit of the microsimulation approach in this area is that the modeling accounts for a

more detailed analysis of individual movements and behavior of vehicles and other travelers as well as the interactions between travel modes.

Given the dynamic operations of the Core Street Reconfiguration Area, which can be characterized by oversaturated conditions, aggressive

driving behaviors, and multimodal operations (i.e. transit vehicles and pedestrians), the use of VISSIM is appropriate.

The VISSIM microsimulation model was calibrated to observed traffic conditions in Rosslyn. Specifically, the model was calibrated to accurately

replicate the observed traffic volumes and flows, multimodal (transit, pedestrian, and bicycle) volumes at intersections in the study area, travel

time along key corridors, queuing and congestion at study area intersections, and known traffic bottleneck locations. Driver behaviors and

vehicle operating parameters were adjusted to better reflect observed traffic conditions in Rosslyn. The documentation of VISSIM model

development and the calibration process is provided in the technical appendix.

The calibrated VISSIM models were used to simulate and report overall peak hour delay at intersections, average and maximum queue lengths for approaches at critical intersections, and travel time and speeds for critical north-south and east-west street segments. VISSIM reports control delay in seconds of delay per vehicle (s/veh) rather than in units of passenger car equivalents as required by HCM-based analysis. Since VISSIM microsimulation contains different definitions for similarly-named MOEs from HCM, a direct correlation cannot be made between the two methods. Regardless, simulated delays are related to level of service using the HCM-based LOS thresholds. The results of the overall intersection simulated vehicle delay as shown graphically in Figure 33 and Figure 34. Results presented are from an average of 10 simulation runs.

Detailed VISSIM results (i.e. simulated delays, average queuing, and maximum queuing by movement and approach, as well as additional simulated travel times for freeways) can be found in the technical appendix.



Page 46

The simulation results suggest that most signalized study area intersections operate with simulated delays equivalent to LOS E or better, which

represents acceptable intersection delays in urban conditions. Intersections that operate at LOS F during the AM peak hour are:

• N. Nash Street and Eastbound Lee Highway,

• N. Nash Street and Arlington Boulevard,

• N. Meade Street and eastbound Arlington Boulevard, and

• N. Oak Street and Clarendon Boulevard

It is noted that there is a limitation in the method in which intersection delays are attributed to each intersection in VISSIM. The average intersection delay is calculated as the average delay experienced by all vehicles approaching the intersection from the closest upstream intersection during the analysis period.

Due to the numerous, closely-spaced intersections within the Rosslyn grid of streets, there is a limit to the number of vehicles that are

considered in the VISSIM delay calculation for each intersection. As such, VISSIM delays, which only consider the distance to the nearest

upstream intersection, appear to show unrealistically good LOS at certain intersections. To offset these counterintuitive results, MOEs such as

travel time/speed, queuing, and cumulative delays have been developed to better represent the travel delays from end to end of a corridor.

Reviewing these MOEs and the VISSIM delays at the first intersection of a corridor (which is unconstrained by a short block length) are more

representative of the significant congestion that is present on Rosslyn streets during the peak period.

Recognizing the lower reported average intersection delays for specific intersections, an additional MOE was developed to more accurately represent the cumulative delays that a traveler would experience as they traveled along corridors within the Core Street Reconfiguration Area. These cumulative delays are shown in Table 8, Figure 35, and Figure 36. Free flow travel time is also included in Table 8 for context; delays represent time in addition to free flow conditions. As shown in Table 8, nearly every segment analyzed during the AM peak hour operates with delays that are double or triple the free flow travel time. Similarly, for most segments analyzed during the PM peak hour, delays exceed free flow travel time.

Representative queuing at critical intersections within the Core Street reconfiguration area is presented in Table 9. Generally, the results indicate

that maximum vehicle queues, i.e. the amount of queuing that may be reached during the peak of congestion during the peak hours, far exceeds

the available block lengths for nearly every approach of the identified critical intersections. During the AM peak hour, the expected average

queuing also far exceeds the available block lengths for nearly every approach of the identified critical intersections. PM peak hour queuing is

generally less severe than the queuing observed during the AM peak hour.



Page 47

Figure 33: Existing Peak Hour Simulated Intersection Delay (VISSIM)




Page 48

Figure 34: Existing Peak Hour Simulated Intersection Delay (VISSIM) continued




Page 49

Table 8: Cumulative Segment Peak Hour Delays per Vehicle

Segment Free Flow Travel Time

(seconds)

Segment Delay (seconds/veh)

AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour

Northbound N. Lynn Street (Arlington Blvd to George Washington Memorial Pkwy)

89 251 101

Southbound Fort Myer Drive (George Washington Memorial Pkwy to Arlington Blvd)

90 91 64

Eastbound Clarendon Boulevard (N. Rhodes St to N. Arlington Ridge Rd)

98 202 158

Westbound Wilson Blvd (N. Arlington Ridge Road to N. Oak St)

48 96 85

Eastbound 19th Street N. (Key Blvd to N. Kent St)

26 57 49

Westbound 19th Street N. (N. Kent St to Key Blvd)

27 78 194

Eastbound Lee Highway (N. Veitch St to N. Lynn St)

86 238 75

Westbound Lee Highway (N. Lynn St to N. Scott St)

50 23 18

Total travel time is free flow travel time plus delay. Values in RED indicate segments with cumulative delay greater than free flow travel time. Source: Project VISSIM model.



Page 50

Figure 35: AM Peak Hour Cumulative Segment Delay per Vehicle




Page 51

Figure 36: PM Peak Hour Cumulative Segment Delay per Vehicle




Page 52

Table 9: Critical Intersection VISSIM Approach Queues

Location Block Length

(feet)

AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour

VISSIM Max Queue (feet)

VISSIM Average

Queue (feet)

VISSIM Max Queue (feet)

VISSIM Average

Queue (feet)

NB N. Lynn Street at Fort Myer Drive/George Washington Memorial Parkway on-ramp

360 1593 408 1295 282

NB N. Lynn Street at Key Bridge 250 1763 834 1270 287

SB George Washington Memorial Parkway off-ramp to Key Bridge

1,000 1100 1032 1101 1035

WB I-66 off-ramp at N. Lynn Street 1,670 2024 657 779 185

EB Lee Highway N. Lynn Street 390 2702 886 2239 401

SB Fort Myer Drive at 19th Street N. 450 740 118 328 28

EB Key Boulevard at N. Nash Street 60 1086 154 441 23

EB 19th Street N. at N. Lynn Street 90 2346 442 334 41

NB N. Lynn Street at Wilson Boulevard 560 1136 404 525 96

EB Wilson Boulevard at N. Lynn Street 160 1012 290 520 87

EB Wilson Boulevard at Fort Myer Drive 90 1278 208 739 215

WB Wilson Boulevard at Fort Myer Drive 200 351 45 226 49

EB Clarendon Boulevard at N. Oak Street 560 2083 575 654 158

WB Wilson Boulevard at N. Oak Street 125 394 69 540 76

SB N. Moore Street at Wilson Boulevard 640 280 41 181 65

NB N. Lynn Street at Fairfax Drive 240 1597 449 423 38

EB Arlington Boulevard on-ramp from N. Meade Street 470 2651 1078 22 0

EB Arlington Boulevard off-ramp to N. Meade Street 800 2172 466 0 0 Values in RED indicate queues exceed block length Source: Project VISSIM Model



Page 53

Synchro Analysis Results The Synchro analysis of study area intersections is based on HCM methodology to measure intersection capacity based on vehicle delays.

Synchro is used to report vehicle delay and 95th percentile queuing at study area intersections. The HCM defines capacity as the maximum

number of vehicles that can pass over a road segment or through an intersection within a fixed time duration. Operational conditions are

described by a level of service, which is a qualitative measure that describes the operational conditions of an intersection or street and is an

indicator of motorist perceptions within a traffic stream. The HCM defines six levels of service (LOS), LOS A through F, with A as the best and F

the worst. Table 10 shows the ranges of delay per vehicle for signalized and unsignalized intersections, with corresponding LOS. Arlington County

does not maintain a minimum LOS requirement. In most urban areas such as Rosslyn, LOS E is generally considered acceptable, particularly along

arterial and collector streets with significant traffic

volumes.

The results of the overall intersection vehicle

delay and LOS analyses are shown graphically in

Figure 37. Detailed Synchro results are included

in the technical appendix. All signalized study

area intersections operate at LOS E or better.

Operational Analysis Summary Existing traffic operations in Rosslyn is

characterized by the following:

• AM peak period: eastbound and northbound queueing and congestion

• PM peak period: eastbound and westbound queueing and congestion. Southbound congestion along Fort Myer Drive

• Queuing that far exceeds the typical Rosslyn block lengths; increase the occurrence of waiting through more than one signal cycle to progress through intersections during the peak periods

• Vehicle operating speeds are far below the posted speed limits during the peak periods.

• Regional gateways into and out of DC, such as the Key Bridge and the Theodore Roosevelt Bridge, are congested during the peak periods,

which causes congestion to spill back throughout Rosslyn

• Gateways into and out of Rosslyn from limited access facilities, such as Arlington Boulevard, George Washington Memorial Parkway, and I-

66, are congested during the peak periods, which causes congestion to spill back throughout Rosslyn

Level

of

Service

Average Control Delay per

Vehicle (seconds) General Service Description for Signalized

Intersections Signalized

Unsignalize

d

A ≤ 10 ≤ 10 Free Flow

B > 10 – 20 > 10 – 15 Stable Flow (slight delays)

C > 20 – 35 > 15 – 25 Stable Flow (acceptable delays)

D > 35 – 55 > 25 – 35 Approaching Unstable Flow (tolerable delays)

E > 55 – 80 > 35 – 50 Unstable Flow (intolerable delay)

F > 80 > 50 Forced Flow (congested and queues fail to clear) Source: Highway Capacity Manual, 2010 Edition

Table 10: Level of Service (LOS) Criteria



Page 54

Figure 37: Existing Peak Hour Intersection Delay (Synchro)

Source: Project Synchro Model

LEGEND


LOS A LOS B

LOS C

LOS D LOS E LOS F




Page 55

Existing Conditions Vehicle Measures Table 11 summarizes the evaluation metrics for the vehicular performance measures.

Table 11: Vehicle Measures


Quantity of Vehicle Person Trips

For each of the potential street reconfiguration alternatives, the quantity of vehicle person trips will be measured to compare between alternatives.

Queues15 at Critical Intersections Approaches

Number of critical intersection approaches with queues that exceed available block length during peak hours

AM: 16 out of 18 approaches PM: 11 out of 18 approaches

Overall Vehicle Delay16 at Intersections

Number of intersections operating with significant overall delay (LOS F) during peak hours (VISSIM analysis area)

5 out of 43 intersections during the AM and/or PM peak hours

Peak Period Travel Time/Speed17

Number of critical segments with travel speeds less than 50 percent of posted speed limit during peak hours

AM: 5 out of 6 critical segments PM: 3 out of 6 critical segments

15 Source: Project VISSIM model 16 Source: Project VISSIM model 17 Source: Project VISSIM model



Page 56

Parking and Curbspace Arlington County completed a detailed assessment of

curbspace in the Rosslyn area. The various uses of

curbspace within the Core Street Reconfiguration area

are shown in Figure 38 (map) and Figure 39 (pie

chart). Competing curb space demands include:

• On-street parking

• Carshare parking

• Bus stops

• Bikeshare

• Loading zones

• Taxi stands

• Bus parking

▪ Pick-up and drop-off of Transportation

Network Companies (e.g. Uber and Lyft)

Within the Core Street Reconfiguration Area, signed

no parking areas take up approximately half of the

curb space (by length).

The three next prominent uses are: on-street parking,

driveways, and curb ramps. Vehicle parking is

generally concentrated on the north-south streets.

The area of Moore Street between 19th Street N and

Wilson Boulevard is unique area in which curbspace is

only for bus parking.

Figure 38: Parking and Curbspace Allocation

Source: Rosslyn Sector Plan Curb Space Inventory, July 2017



Page 57

Within the Core Street Reconfiguration Area, there is

approximately 2,910 feet of curbspace dedicated to

on-street parking. This is approximately 132 on-street

parking spaces. About half of the Core Street

Reconfiguration Area is no parking, as many curbs are

adjacent to travel lanes.

As show in Figure 39, Rosslyn, per the Rosslyn Sector

Plan, contains approximately 22,000 off-street parking

spaces in privately controlled garages. Occupancy of

the off-street parking varies by location, but several

garages have capacities that exceed demand.

Construction Zone, 4% BikeShare, 1%

Bus Parking, 6%

Curb Ramp, 12%

Driveway, 11%

Handicap Parking, 1%

Taxi, 1%

Parking, 13%Loading Zone,

1%

No Parking, 50%

Figure 39: Curbspace Distribution

Source: Rosslyn Sector Plan Curb Space Inventory, July 2017



Page 58

Existing Condition Parking and Curbspace Measures Table 12 shows the evaluation metrics for the parking and curbspace performance measures.

Table 12: Parking and Curbspace Performance Measures


Quantity of On-Street Parking Supply Existing number of on-street parking (Core Street Reconfiguration Area)

Approximately 2,910 feet of curbspace, approximately 130 on-street parking spaces

Quantity of New Multimodal Curb Space Existing Multimodal Curb Space (Core Street Reconfiguration Area)

Approximately 1,855 feet curbspace18, or 8.5% of the total curbspace

18 Assumed to include car share, bike share, loading zone, taxi, bus parking areas shown on Figure 38.



Page 59

Urban Design Arlington County emphasizes incorporating urban

design principles into new construction and

planning projects. Reduction of impervious areas

and the addition of streetscaping enhancements is

vital to develop sustainable and desirable places to

live, work, and play. Pervious areas within the

public right-of-way, street lighting and the relative

level of landscaping for street segments are shown

in Figure 40 and Figure 41.

Generally, pervious areas are concentrated in the

northern portion of the Core Street Reconfiguration

Area.

A few prominent street segments have a low

density of street lights:

• Blocks of N. Oak Street between Key Boulevard

and Wilson Boulevard

• Blocks of Fort Myer Drive and N. Lynn Street

between Wilson Boulevard and Clarendon

Boulevard

Figure 40: Pervious Areas



Page 60

Most of the street segments within the Core

Street Reconfiguration Area have streetscaping

on at least one side.

Figure 41: Street Landscaping



Page 61

Existing Condition Urban Design Measures Table 13 shows the evaluation metrics for the Urban Design performance measures.

Table 13: Urban Design Performance Measures

Measure of Effectiveness Evaluation Metric Value

Percent of Impervious Area Existing impervious area percent measured using CAD/GIS data provided by Arlington County (Core Street Reconfiguration Area)

82% (16.95 acres)

Percent of Street Tree Coverage/Landscaping

Existing street tree coverage/landscaping area percent measured using aerial data (Core Street Reconfiguration Area)

81% of the street centerlines have landscape features19

19 For calculation purposes, if a street had landscaping on one side, its length was reduced by a factor of one-half.



Page 62

Existing Conditions Summary The following section summarizes overall state of transportation and urban design in the Core Street Reconfiguration Area of Rosslyn,

specifically incorporating key points identified in the Rosslyn Sector Plan and additional findings determined as part of the existing conditions

report. The Rosslyn Core Street Reconfiguration Area concepts to be developed will consider how the existing challenges can be addressed and

how existing opportunities can be realized.

Travel Patterns • Rosslyn’s unique location creates the need to balance local and regional mobility in considering modifications to Rosslyn’s multimodal

network.

o The Rosslyn neighborhood is adjacent to five vehicle facilities of regional and local significance and is served by four metro

lines.

• Transit and active transportation modes are important for Rosslyn residents and commuters.

o Over half (57%) of Rosslyn residents commute to work either by public transportation, walking, or biking.

o Half (51%) of all AM commute trips for Rosslyn employees are via public transportation, walking, or biking.

Transit • Metrorail capacity serving Rosslyn is reaching its limits.

o Rosslyn is the 2nd busiest station in Virginia by ridership averaging about 24,000 total daily boarding and alightings.

• N. Moore Street and the areas surrounding the Metrorail station must balance programming demands to facilitate intermodal transfers

including pedestrian flow, bicycle access and parking, bus stops, and efficient bus operations .

o As of May 1, 2018, five bus bays are located along N. Moore St directly at the Metrorail station.

o The Central Plan Transit Tunnel will allow for improved operations and reduce delays associated with multiple left turns.

Pedestrians • High volumes of pedestrian activity use Rosslyn’s streets, while some intersection crossings have limited space and short pedestrian crossing

times.

o The busiest intersections have over 2,200 pedestrians per hour and in multiple cases exceed the number of vehicles in the

peak hour.

o 7 out of 47 crossings in the Core Street Reconfiguration Area lack sufficient pedestrian crossing times.

o Five intersections in the Core Street Reconfiguration Area operate with failing (LOS E or F) pedestrian levels of service.

• Many sidewalks are too narrow to comfortably accommodate Rosslyn pedestrian volumes (Rosslyn Sector Plan) and many sidewalks are

frequently interrupted by driveways.



Page 63

o Driveways constitute about 11% of curbspace in the Core Street Reconfirmation Area.

• Long, uninterrupted blocks hinder pedestrian access and can make streets more difficult to navigate for pedestrians.

o Block lengths between 19th Street North and Wilson Boulevard are approximately twice the size of peer neighborhood blocks.

o Pedestrians are observed crossing outside of crosswalks, especially on longer blocks.

Bicycles • Rosslyn’s street grid creates gaps in the County’s extensive system of bike lanes and regional trails.

o Bicycle activity in Rosslyn is much more prevalent on the trail network as compared to the intersections.

• Rosslyn’s on-street bike lane network is limited and unmarked routes have high traffic volumes, rendering these roadways unwelcoming to

bicyclists.

o Within the Core Street Reconfiguration Area, the only on-street bike lane is on N. Lynn Street.

• Even in locations with bicycle lanes, on-street biking can provide a stressful environment based on street width, high traffic volumes on-

street parking, and pick-up/drop off use.

o 85% of segments in the Core Street Reconfiguration area show BLTS 3, which is uncomfortable for the average bicyclist. Only

6% of segments show BLTS 1, which is the most comfortable condition.

Vehicles • Vehicles remain the primary travel mode for trips of all purposes and the most direct source of traffic and travel congestion in Rosslyn.

o Auto trips make up approximately 50% of all daily trips from and to Rosslyn.

• Much of the peak period traffic within Rosslyn’s vehicular network is passing through Rosslyn on its way somewhere else (Rosslyn Sector

Plan).

o Approximately 80%of peak period traffic is moving through the Rosslyn Study Area (does not stop within Rosslyn).

• Rosslyn’s existing street and block pattern is characterized by long blocks that limit circulation patterns, complicate loading and service, and

facilitate cut-through traffic.

o Vehicles traveling along three-quarters of analyzed streets segments experience cumulative delays greater than the free flow

speed during the AM or PM peak hour (resulting in more than double the travel time compared to free flow conditions).

• Regional gateways into DC, such as the Key Bridge and the Theodore Roosevelt Bridge, are often congested during the peak period, which

results in congestion throughout Rosslyn.

o During the AM peak period, eastbound corridors are congested. This is directly related to congestion at the Theodore

Roosevelt Bridge.

o Northbound travel on N. Lynn Street experiences congestion throughout the core of Rosslyn due to congestion at the

northern gateway, significant traffic on east-west crossing streets, and heavy pedestrian volume during the peak periods.



Page 64

o Southbound travel on Fort Myer Drive experiences congestion at the gateways on both ends of the corridor during the peak

periods.

Parking and Curbspace • Mobility demands availability.

o Approximately half of the curbspace is “no parking” due to the need for mobility (travel lanes), especially during peak

periods.

• Many uses compete for remaining curbspace

o Parking, driveways, carshare parking, bus parking, bus stops, bikeshare locations, loading zones, taxi stands, TNC pickup

areas, and curb ramps are all present along Rosslyn’s curbspace.

Urban Design • Street trees and vegetation offer shade, scale and beauty in certain areas, but some streets still have little or no landscape oriented to the

pedestrian.

o Approximately 81% of the street centerlines have landscape features.

• Several blocks within the Core Street reconfiguration have a low density of street lights.

o Blocks along N. Oak Street, Fort Myer Drive, and N. Lynn Street.

• Several Highways, steep grades, and other barriers significantly limit convenient access.

o Features like the Fort Myer Tunnel and skywalks are barriers to active transportation users.



Page 65

Table 14: Performance Measures Summary

Mode / Element

Measures of Effectiveness

Transit

Quantity of Transit Person Trips

The quantity of new transit person trips related to each study alternatives will be compared under future conditions.

Quantity of Bus Stop Locations

Number of existing stops in Core Street Reconfiguration Area

15 existing stops

Quality of Bus Stop Facilities

The number of recommended improved shelters or other amenities will be measured related to each study alternatives will be compared under future conditions.

Transit Average Speed Average travel speed for representative bus routes between entry and exit points to the modeled network

AM: 6.0 mph PM: 11.2 mph

Pedestrian

Quantity of Pedestrian Person Trips

The quantity of new transit person trips related to each study alternatives will be compared under future conditions.

Pedestrian Experience and Comfort

Area of sidewalk in the public right-of-way (Core Street Reconfiguration Area)

126,400 square feet (approximately 2.9 acres) of sidewalk

Quantity of Enhanced Crosswalks

The number of new or enhanced pedestrian crossings related to each study alternatives will be compared under future conditions.

Pedestrian Delay (seconds) at Critical Intersections

Number of intersections with 40 or more seconds of pedestrian delay (LOS E or F)


Pedestrian Crossing Times Number of crossings where pedestrian crossing time is not sufficient for the crossing distance

7 out of 47 crossings

Bicycle

Quantity of Bicycle Person Trips

The quantity of new bicycle person trips related to each study alternatives will be compared under future conditions.

Bicycle Network Connections to Local/Regional Trails

Number of connection points in the modeling context area to major trails (Custis Trail, Mount Vernon Trail, and Arlington Boulevard Trail)

4 trail connection points

Quantity of New or Improved Dedicated Bicycle Facilities

Existing BLTS segments (Core Street Reconfiguration Area)

86% of segments are BLTS 3 or 4



Page 66

Mode / Element

Measures of Effectiveness

Bicycle Delay (seconds) at Critical Intersections

Number of critical intersections with 40 or more seconds of bicycle delay (LOS E or F)


Vehicles

Quantity of Vehicular Person Trips

The quantity of vehicle person trips related to each study alternatives will be compared under future conditions.

Queues at Critical Intersections

Number of critical intersection approaches with queues that exceed available block length during peak hours

AM: 16 out of 18 approaches PM: 11 out of 18 approaches

Overall Vehicle Delay at Intersections

Number of intersections operating with significant overall delay (LOS F) during peak hours (VISSIM analysis area)

5 out of 43 intersections during the AM and/or PM peak hours

Peak Period Travel Time/Speed

Number of critical segments with travel speeds less than 50 percent of posted speed limit during peak hours

AM: 5 out of 6 critical segments PM: 3 out of 6 critical segments

Parking & Curb Space

Quantity of On-Street Parking Supply

Existing number of on-street parking (Core Street Reconfiguration Area)

Approximately 130 on-street parking spaces

Quantity of New Multimodal Curb Space

Existing Multimodal Curb Space (Core Street Reconfiguration Area)

Approximately 8.5% of the total curbspace

Urban Design

Percentage of Impervious Area

Existing impervious area percent measured using CAD/GIS data provided by Arlington County (Core Street Reconfiguration Area)

82% (16.95 acres)

Percentage of Street Tree Coverage/Landscaping

Existing street tree coverage/landscaping area percent measured using aerial data (Core Street Reconfiguration Area)

81% of the street centerlines


core of rosslyn transportation study - amazon web services€¦ · core of rosslyn transportation...

Documents