16th Street NW Corridor Project

16th Street NW Corridor Project Final Report
Washington, D.C.
Prepared For: District Department of Transportation 55 M Street, SE Washington, D.C, 20003 (202) 478- 1458 Prepared By: Kittelson & Associates, Inc. 36 South Charles Street, Suite 1920 Baltimore, MD 21201 (410) 347-9610 Project Manager: Kevin Lee, P.E., PTOE Project Principal: Brandon Nevers, P.E., PTOE Analyst: Caitlin Doolin and James Wong Project No. 11066 April 2013
Table of Contents
Executive Summary ........................................................................................................................................ i Section 1. Introduction ................................................................................................................................. 1 Section 2. Project Purpose and Need ........................................................................................................... 9 Section 3. Related Studies and Corridor Context........................................................................................ 13 Section 4. Existing Conditions ..................................................................................................................... 20 Section 5. Corridor Level Alternatives ........................................................................................................ 42 Section 6. Intersection Level Alternatives .................................................................................................. 62 Section 7. Recommendations and Next Steps ............................................................................................ 79 Section 8. Coordination Activities ............................................................................................................... 82
List of Tables and Figures

Table 1.Evaluation Criteria for Breakout Projects ...................................................................................... 11 Table 2. Previous Projects and Studies Recommendation Summary ......................................................... 15 Table 3. Summary of Breakout Project Descriptions .................................................................................. 18 Table 4. Summary of Key Traffic Operations at Key Intersections ............................................................. 27 Table 5. Existing Bus Schedule .................................................................................................................... 30 Table 6. Summary of TCQSM Analysis Results ............................................................................................ 32 Table 7. Assumptions for Vehicle-Throughput ........................................................................................... 34 Table 8. Summary of Existing Person-Throughput Demand ....................................................................... 35 Table 9. Summary of Challenges and Opportunities along the 16th Street NW Corridor ........................... 40 Table 10. Summary of Traffic Operations at Key Intersections for Full Time Through Lanes Alternative.. 45 Table 11 Summary of Traffic Operations at Key Intersections for Two-way Left-Turn Lane Alternative ... 47 Table 12 Summary of Traffic Operations at Key Intersections for Raised Median Alternative ................. 49 Table 13 Summary of Traffic Operations at Key Intersections for Part-Time Transit Lane Alternative .... 51 Table 14. Relative impacts of Typical Section Options for 16th Street NW Peak ourTransit Lanes - South of U Street ....................................................................................................................................................... 53 Table 15. Summary of Traffic Operations at Key Intersections for Full-Time Transit Lanes Alternatives .. 54 Table 16. Evaluation Matrix ........................................................................................................................ 57 Table 17. Corridor Options and Potential Changes to the Columbia Road NW/Harvard Road NW/Irving Street Study Area ........................................................................................................................................ 71 Table 18. Existing Operations at the AM and PM Peak Hours at 16th Street NW/Park Road ..................... 73 Table 19. Lane Configurations Alternatives for 16th Street NW/Park Road ................................................ 74 Table 20. Existing Traffic Operations for 16th Street NW/Arkansas Avenue............................................... 76 Table 21. Coordination and Partner Meeting Summary ............................................................................. 87 Figure 1. Project Study Area ......................................................................................................................... 3 Figure 2. Map of Literature Reviews within Study Area ............................................................................. 16 Figure 3. Breakout Project Locations .......................................................................................................... 19 Figure 4. Existing Conditions Typical Cross Sections ................................................................................... 22 Figure 5. Aerial of 16th Street NW/Columbia Road NW/ Harvard Road NW and 16th Street NW/Arkansas Avenue ........................................................................................................................................................ 23 Figure 6. 16th Street NW Volume Profiles ................................................................................................... 25 Figure 7. Lane Utilization Graph for AM Peak Hour North of Park Road .................................................... 26
Figure 8. Lane Utilization Graph for PM Peak Hour North of Park Road .................................................... 26 Figure 9. Existing on-street Parking Restrictions ........................................................................................ 29 Figure 10. Existing Bus Frequency............................................................................................................... 30 Figure 11. Map of Existing Bus Stops and Services ..................................................................................... 31 Figure 12. Steps for Calculating Existing Person-Throughput Demand ...................................................... 35 Figure 13. Annual Frequecy of Crashes Along 16th Street NW, 3006-2010 ................................................ 36 Figure 14. Severity Crash Analysis............................................................................................................... 37 Figure 15. Crash Type Analysis .................................................................................................................... 38 Figure 16. Summary Overview of Typical Sections Alternatives ................................................................. 44 Figure 17. Overview of Full Time Through Lanes Alternative ..................................................................... 58 Figure 18. Overview of Peak Hour Transit Lanes Alternative ..................................................................... 59 Figure 19. Overview of Raised Median Alternative .................................................................................... 60 Figure 20. Existing Geometry and Circulation at CHI .................................................................................. 65 Figure 21. Option 1: Geometry and Circulation at CHI ............................................................................... 66 Figure 22. Option 2: Geometry and Circulation at CHI ............................................................................... 66 Figure 23. Option 3: Geometry and Circulation at CHI ............................................................................... 67 Figure 24. Option 4: Geometry and Circulation at CHI ............................................................................... 68 Figure 25. Option 5: Geometry and Circulation at CHI ............................................................................... 68 Figure 26. Columbia-Harvard-Irving: Issues/Opportunities Map................................................................ 70 Figure 27. Westbound approach on Park Road .......................................................................................... 72 Figure 28. Concept Design for 16th Street NW/Arkansas Avenue............................................................... 78
Executive Summary
INTRODUCTION
The goal of the 16th Street NW corridor project is to identify physical and operational improvements for person mobility and safety along the corridor. 16th Street NW is a vital corridor for moving people into and out of downtown (north-south) and to and from adjacent neighborhoods (east-west). It is relied upon heavily by motorists, pedestrians, and transit riders. WMATA has identified the corridor as a priority bus corridor, and DDOT has identified the corridor as a key pedestrian safety corridor, major arterial, and evacuation route. Currently the corridor experiences extensive vehicle queuing during peak periods, limited east-west connectivity for all users, and relatively high transit delay. As demand along the corridor continues to grow, it will become even more challenging to meet both local and regional mobility needs for the corridors wide range of users and uses. Through a collaborative investigation and evaluation process, the DDOT project team has identified improvements to meet these challenges. Key recommendations include: Implement peak-hour peak-direction transit lanes from Arkansas Avenue NW to H Street NW and Improve pedestrian safety with intersection modifications at Park Road NW, Irving Street/15th Street NW, and Arkansas Avenue NW. Transit lanes along the corridor can increase person throughput and reduce transit travel times. The project team has conducted technical analysis to support the feasibility of these recommendations. A summary of the analysis, next steps, and an implementation plan is provided in the following memorandum.
EXISTING TYPICAL SECTION

The 16th Street NW corridor has a minimum of a 50 foot curb-to-curb section throughout the study limits which extends 6.4 miles between H Street NW and Eastern Avenue NW. However, within these limits 16 th Street NW has three distinct typical sections: a raised landscape median on the north end, a center reversible lane in the mid-section, and a four-lane section (two travel lanes in each direction) on the south end.
ii
Alternatives Evaluation Three typical section options were taken forward in the evaluation process and compared to no-build conditions (1) Full-time Through Lanes, (2) Peak-hour Peak-direction Transit Lane, and (3) Raised/Landscaped Median. Each option was evaluated relative to the existing corridor conditions for four major criteria: Safety, Mobility, Community, and Feasibility. The results of the qualitative comparison are shown in the following table:
Each option considered for 16th Street NW presents tradeoffs. The Raised/Landscaped Median option provides the highest safety and community benefits, but has significant negative impacts on mobility. The Full-Time Through lane option is the most feasible option in terms of implementation, but the option does not meet future demand for person throughput along corridor. The Peak-hour Peak-direction Transit lane option balances mobility and community needs but impacts auto mobility.
iii
PROJECT EVALUATION PROCESS SUMMARY

The project team worked closely with DDOT staff from PPSA, IPMA, TOA, and PTSA to establish a range of improvement options for the corridor and conducted an evaluation using both qualitative and quantitative measures. Since the start of the project in July 2010, the Project Team has worked closely with DDOT through 11 progress and working meetings to refine the evaluation process and its results. The flow chart to the right describes the steps undertaken by the project team. A summary of each of these steps follows. Issues and Opportunities The project team utilized past projects within the study area, field visits, and DDOT staff to assess the key issues and opportunities along the corridor. It was determined that the critical areas for improvement were within the existing reversible lane section between U Street NW and Arkansas Avenue NW. Key elements included the operations and safety of the reversible lane at the Columbia/Harvard/Irving intersections as well as pedestrian safety at Arkansas Avenue. Alternatives Development The project team identified a wide-range of potential options for reconfiguring 16th Street NW, with a focus on the reversible lane section between U Street NW and Arkansas Avenue NW. The full set of typical section options include:
No Build Removing the Reversible Lane Full-time through/general purpose lane Two-way Left-turn lane Raised/Landscaped median Median with full time transit lanes Median with full time transit/HOV lanes
Identify Issues and Opportunities
Develop Alternatives
Evaluate Alternatives
Select Preferred Alternative
Reversible Lane with Transit Options Full time transit lanes Peak-hour Peak-direction transit lanes
Extend the Reversible Lane
iv
Preferred Alternative Technical analysis was performed to support the operational feasibility of the options analyzing person throughput, intersection and corridor operations, safety, and transit operations. Based on the results, the project team determined that the Peak-hour Peak-direction Transit lane option provided the greatest potential for improving person mobility along the corridor while meeting DDOT and WMATA goals. This option would extend for 2.7 miles between H Street NW and Arkansas Avenue NW. Based on the project teams analysis, the Peak-hour Peak-direction Transit lanes are estimated to have the following benefits: Increase transit travel speeds by 30-percent; and Accommodate up to a 10-percent increase in person demand.
Drawbacks to the implementation of this option include: Increase in vehicular delays at critical intersections along the corridor, including U Street, the Columbia/Harvard/Argonne intersections and R Street; and Inability to reduce crossing distances and vehicle exposure for pedestrians crossing 16th Street. While this alternative is technically feasible, there are, however, some substantial challenges to this alternative. Decisions about how to proceed need to be made in coordination with DDOTs long term planning activities.
Conceptual Layouts The following figure provides an illustration of the typical section for 16th Street NW for the section between Arkansas Avenue and Park Road NW for both existing conditions and with implementation of the Peak-hour Peak-direction Transit lanes.
Existing Typical Section Between Arkansas Avenue to Park Road NW
Peak-hour Peak-direction Transit Lane Between Arkansas Avenue to Park Road NW
On-street parking is currently permitted on portions of 16th Street NW in off-peak time periods and peak periods in the opposite direction. To address potential mobility concerns, on-street parking could be restricted to provide additional vehicular capacity. As the project moves forward, the project team will evaluate parking management strategies and their associated trade-offs.
ADDITIONAL SAFETY IMPROVEMENTS

In addition to identifying improvements to the typical section for 16th Street NW, the project team identified opportunities to improve pedestrian safety at critical locations identified in the Pedestrian Master Plan, including the intersections of Arkansas Avenue, Park Road, and Irving Street at 16th Street NW. Improvements include reducing side-street crossing distances and reducing intersection skews. A schematic showing improvements to the Arkansas Avenue/16th Street NW intersection is shown in the figure below.
vi
NEXT STEPS
The project team recommends advancing the Peak-hour Peak-direction Transit lane option by conducting additional analysis to address specific questions raised during the DDOT review process and developing an Implementation Plan that describes the steps and approvals needed for full implementation and operation. The key next steps are as follows: Review preferred alternative in the context of DDOTs long-range plan. Implement short-term safety improvements using low-cost techniques that do not preclude mid- to long-term corridor level improvements. Locations identified in this study for potential short-term improvements include: 16th Street NW/Columbia Road NW/Harvard Road NW. This location requires further study to refine improvements. 16th Street NW/Arkansas Avenue.
vii
Obtain approval for DDOTs preferred alternative Complete preliminary design for preferred alternative including: Refine detailed traffic operations analysis to determine the preferred intersection treatments, lane configurations, and parking management at key sections along the corridor. Conduct micro-simulation modeling at select intersections such as Columbia/Harvard, Irving/15th Street, and Arkansas Avenue. Assess impact to on-street parking along the corridor and evaluate options for removing/relocating parking. Prepare a design plan to determine how the corridor and intersections will look and function.
Solicit feedback through a public open house to gain public and political input and the determine level of support for the proposed recommendations. The open house should describe the purpose and need of the project, the alternatives that were evaluated along with the evaluation results, and the recommended improvements and implementation plan.
Build partnerships for implementation with WMATA, Maryland SHA, and MTA. WMATA: Success of the project depends largely on the number of buses that use the peak hour transit lane. Under current service levels, approximately 25 buses per hour would travel in the transit lane during the peak hours; this is generally considered the minimum threshold for a dedicated transit lane. In order to realize the full potential of person throughput, an increase in transit service along the corridor above the current levels will be necessary by WMATA. Further, the addition of transit lane corridors along H Street, I Street, and K Street would build a critical mass of transit lanes in the District and improve network-wide performance for transit riders. Maryland SHA and MTA: Coordination with Maryland SHA and MTA provides the opportunity to create a regionally connected transit network. The northern portions of the WMATA S-line routes connect to the Silver Spring transit center and coordination with SHA and MTA will allow a seamless continuation of transit preferential treatments to a major hub.
viii
MWCOG: Coordination with MWCOG will be necessary through the implementation process to define analysis requirements for assessing impacts to air quality, and regional travel patterns.
Develop 30-percent design plans to be approved by PPSA, TOA, and IPMA prior to final design. Thirty-percent design plans will address intersection lane configurations, traffic control, striping, and transit treatments along the corridor and refined estimates of implementation costs.
Prepare final design plans upon approval of 30-percent plans (to be led by IPMA). Coordinate with partner agencies such as the Metropolitan Police Department, TOA, and DDOT Roadway Maintenance to determine needs and protocols for key operational elements such as enforcement, signal operation/transit priority, maintenance, and evacuation procedures.
ix
Section 1 Introduction
16th Street NW Corridor Project
Final Report
Introduction
The 16th Street NW Corridor is a heavily traveled urban arterial in Washington, DC with high traffic and commuter volumes, high ridership bus routes and Metro stations, and varying roadway cross-sections and functions. The study area covers three wards (Wards 1, 2, and 4), ten Advisory Neighborhood Committees (ANC) (including 1A-D, 2A-F and 4 A-D and 4G), and a wide range of land uses: the southern portion consists predominantly of office, retail, hotels, and government uses and the northern portion is primarily low-density residential in nature. 16th Street NW is a vital corridor for moving people into and out of downtown (north-south) and to and from adjacent neighborhoods (east-west). It is relied upon heavily by motorists, pedestrians, and transit riders. WMATA has identified the corridor as a priority bus corridor, and DDOT has identified the corridor as a key pedestrian safety corridor, major arterial, and evacuation route. The goal for the 16th Street NW corridor project is to identify physical and operational improvements for person mobility and safety along the corridor. This project focuses on the operations and safety along the 16th Street NW corridor; however the project limits follow these general boundaries: Eastern Avenue to the north H Street to the South Georgia Avenue to the East Beach Drive / Rock Creek Parkway to the West
Figure 1 illustrates the project study area as described.
Background
Several planning efforts have already been completed along and around the 16th Street NW corridor, including the Columbia Heights Transportation Study, the Mount Pleasant Transportation Study, the WMATA Metrobus 16th Street Line Study, and the WMATA Priority Corridor Network. While the neighborhood studies have involved in depth evaluation, they are limited in geographic scope. The transit studies, in contrast, have been larger in geographic scope but are limited in technical analysis and design. The purpose of this project builds upon the previous studies by incorporating previous findings and recommendations as a guide and base for alternatives that were developed and evaluated as part of this project.
April 2013
COLLECTOR
CO LL EC TO R
R NO MI
COLLECTOR
L RIA TE AR
COLLECTOR
TOR LEC COL
COLLECTOR
LA RT ER IA
PR INC IPA
COLLECTOR
COLLECTOR
OR CT LLE CO
OR CT LLE CO
CO LLE CT OR
OR CT E LL CO
Beach
Dr
c ea
Dr
Bl
ag
de
Morrow D
rta Po rth Dr No t al r Po
Av e
lD r
ry R
Decatur St
Milita
16th St
Kalm
ia Rd
Aspen St
Kennedy St
Locu
st Rd
14th St
14th St
w Io
ve aA
Co
lor
Al
ad
as
oA
ka
ve
Av e
Ea
st
n er
e Av
13th St
Legend
Street Centerlines
Interstate Principal Arterial Minor Arterial Collector Local
Regional Location of Corridor
Figure #: Corridor Overview K Street to Eastern Ave

Projected Stateplane Coordinate System: Maryland FIPS 1900 Base Data Source: DC GIS
Study Area
16th Street Corridor Study Washington, D.C
Feet
.
0 550
No Warranties of any sort, including accuracy, fitness or merchantability accompany this product.
1,100
2,200
1 inch = 1,100 feet

H:\projfile\11066 - 16th Street NW Corridor Study\gis\Map Template\CorridorOverview_11x17_1100scale.mxd
Final Report
Study Area Characteristics

The thoroughfare is also used by several different modes, providing four bus routes, heavy private auto demand and significant pedestrian activity in certain locations throughout the corridor. However, its existing facilities favor the private automobile significantly. The majority of the pavement space is dedicated to cars and the reversible lane favors peak hour private auto demand. REGIONAL IMPORTANCE The 16th Street NW Corridor is an urban arterial that serves local and regional trips alike through various modes of travel. Commuters from the greater DC and Maryland area use it daily as a significant northsouth thoroughfare. These commuters contribute to the economic growth and development of the area and it is important to maintain acceptable travel conditions for long-distance travel. Along with Georgia Avenue/US 29 it is one of the routes for north-south travel, particularly for commuters traveling between the Capital Beltway to the north and downtown Washington. It is also a designated evacuation route for the White House, increasing its important identity in DCs network. LOCAL IMPORTANCE People who live nearby and use the corridor locally traverse the different neighborhoods in the eastwest direction. The combination of east-west and north-south movements creates conflicts of activity along the corridor. The 16th Street NW corridor traverses several different wards of the city. The thoroughfare acts as a barrier for many of the Districts neighborhoods. The corridor serves as a boundary between neighborhoods because it is busy, large and difficult to cross. This results in diversity of land use throughout the corridor. The northern end of the corridor has areas dedicated to residential land use while the southern end acts more as a central business district with commercial and office uses. Rock Creek Park to the west is a major draw for visitors within and outside of the study area. Other parks and recreational areas in or adjacent to the study area include Scott Circle Park, Meridian Hill Park, National Zoological Park, Beach Parkway Park, and North Portal Park. Other notable uses include Walter Reed Army Medical Center, Walter E. Washington Convention Center, Howard University, numerous foreign embassies, and a multitude of religious institutions. Connectivity in the east-west direction is limited by Rock Creek Park to the west along the northern portion of the study area. The major east-west routes are K Street, Massachusetts Avenue, Rhode Island Avenue NW, U Street, Columbia Road, and Military Road NW, each having direct access to the west
April 2013
Final Report
through Rock Creek Park or south of the Park boundary. Neighborhoods that lie along the eastern edge of Rock Creek Park, such as Crestwood, Mount Pleasant, and Adams Morgan have few points of access to the west and are generally funneled east to the 16th Street Corridor or beyond.
Transportation Context
The study area includes multiple facilities that provide connectivity in the north-south direction, with the principal arterials, 16th Street NW and Georgia Avenue/US 29, accommodating a large percentage of commuters, running continuous from Montgomery County and I-495/Capital Beltway directly into downtown. The connectivity in the east-west direction however, is severely disrupted by Rock Creek Park to the west along the northern portion of the study area. ROADWAY CROSS SECTION From north to south, the cross section of 16th Street varies between four lanes with peak hour on-street parking restrictions (one travel lane per direction during off-peak periods with adjacent on-street parking), five lanes with on-street parking on one side (two travel lanes per direction), five lanes with a reversible lane and peak hour on-street parking restrictions (two to three lanes per direction), and sixlanes with on-street parking (two travel lanes per direction).
TRANSIT ACTIVITY The study area is served by all five Metro lines at 9 total stations: three Orange and Blue, two Red, and four Yellow, and Green. The density of Metro stations is highest in the southern portion of the corridor in and near downtown. The northern 3.5 miles of the corridor study area have limited access to fixed rail transit with the Silver Spring Metro, Silver Spring MARC, and the Takoma Metro stations lying outside of the project area. DDOT is currently planning streetcar lines that will be constructed in three phases, which will impact the 16th Street Corridor. WMATA identifies the 16th Street, Georgia Avenue/7th Street, Rhode Island Avenue, and Massachusetts Avenue corridors as priority bus corridors, meaning that these corridors serve a high volume of bus passengers and are slated for service improvements designed to enhance bus passenger travel times and bus reliability. An express limited-stop service along the 16th Street NW corridor has steadily
April 2013
Final Report
increased transit ridership since it has been deployed. The recent awarding of the TIGER grant for implementing transit preferential treatments along the bus priority corridor presents an opportunity for implementing a series of corridor improvements, increasing transit reliability, potentially decreasing auto trips, and strengthening the relationships between DDOT and WMATA. PEDESTRIAN ACTIVITY The Districts Pedestrian Master Plan identifies a number of high pedestrian deficiency areas within the study area (areas where a combination of pedestrian facility deficiencies and high traffic volumes creates pedestrian safety challenges). These areas include intermittent sections of 16th Street NW. Although the southern portion of the study area has few sidewalk gaps, many gaps in the sidewalk system occur throughout the remaining study area, mostly on local streets, but also on sections of higher-volume streets. The Pedestrian Master Plan identifies that pedestrian crashes occur in many locations throughout the study area, but particularly at the intersections of U Street/16th Street, L Street/Connecticut Avenue, L Street/14th Street, Calvert Street/Columbia Road NW, and Georgia Avenue/Florida Avenue. 16th Street NW and a section of New Hampshire Avenue are identified as a Priority Pedestrian Corridor, and the Pedestrian Master Plan describes a comprehensive set of proposed pedestrian improvements for these streets. In addition, New Hampshire Avenue has received focus from the Districts Great Streets planning effort, while the 16th Street NW corridor received substantial focus from the Columbia Heights/Mount Pleasant Transportation Study. BICYCLE ACTIVITY Neighborhoods within the study area including Mount Pleasant, Adams Morgan, and Columbia Heights experience some of the highest percentage bicycle-commute trips in the District. This level of bicycle activity is attributed to the north-south directness and proximity of the study area to downtown and the existing bicycle facilities and signed routes on 14th Street NW, 13th Street NW, Massachusetts Avenue NW, Rhode Island Avenue NW, R Street NW, and the Rock Creek Park Trail (as documented in the Districts Bicycle Master Plan). The Bicycle Master Plan calls for future bicycle lanes, on-road separated bicycle facilities, and multi-use trails at many locations within the study area. While 16th Street NW is not identified as a primary bike route, bike activity is present. Additionally, a substantial number of bicycle
April 2013
Final Report
crashes in the District occurred in the 16th Street Corridor project area, particularly in the southern portion near downtown.
Project Scope
The 16th Street NW corridor project identified and evaluated potential solutions and outlines an implementation plan for improving the safety and mobility along the corridor. Solution sets that balance the needs of all modes and improve the livability for residents in the are presented in this report this report. Contents of this report include the following: Related Studies and Corridor Context, Existing conditions, Purposes and Needs, Alternatives Development, Preferred Alternative, Implementation plan, and Coordination Activities.
Project Objectives and Goals

To ensure success of the project, the project team outlined goals that would guide the projects alternatives development. The primary broad goals of the 16th Street project are to: 1. Develop a progressive and balanced approach to the operations of 16th Street NW, 2. Explicitly encourage the use of mass transit through service enhancements and efficiencies, 3. Improve safety, mobility, and quality of life, especially for the most vulnerable roadway users including pedestrians, bicyclists, children, and senior citizens. To best accomplish these goals and identify strengths and challenges within the study area, the project team identified specific objectives that would be carried out throughout the tasks of the project: 1. Identify key intersections and street segments that require geometric or operational changes to aid in traffic flow or safety improvements, 2. Devise design drawings and/or management strategies that address mobility and safety, 3. Explore transit priority techniques, such as transit lanes and bus signal priority,
April 2013
Final Report
4. Use appropriate software to test the impacts of alternatives and recommendations, 5. Coordinate DDOT and WMATA planning efforts on 16th Street and establish a model for other similar corridor work, 6. And, develop an implementation plan for the preferred alternative. The above goals and objectives guided the alternatives development process, as discussed in subsequent sections of this report.
Summary of Recommendations and Next Steps

The following provides a summary of the recommendations and next steps outlined as a result of this report: The analysis recommends short-term safety improvements for key intersections, The evaluation of corridorlevel alternatives recommends Peak hour bus-only lane from Maryland Avenue to H Street NW. Further environmental action is required under NEPA for the peak hour bus-only lanes, The peak-hour, bus-only lanes require further evaluation and confirmation of goals through the Districts large scale planning efforts.
April 2013
Section 2 Project Purpose and Needs
Final Report
Purpose
The 16th Street NW corridor is already nearing vehicular capacity, and additional congestion and delay is anticipated on the corridor in the coming years. This means operational strategies that balance mobility and safety needs are imperative to the functionality of the corridor. The purpose of this project is to identify and address safety concerns, optimize operations by prioritizing transit, and improve the quality of life for residents in the area. The project focuses on the operations and safety along the 16 th Street NW corridor; however the project limits follow these general boundaries: Eastern Avenue to the north, H Street to the South, Georgia Avenue to the East, Beach Drive / Rock Creek Parkway to the West.
Study Needs
With the rising demand on the corridor, DDOT sought to identify intersection and corridor level improvements that would meet peak direction and peak demand. The goal of the project is to develop alternatives that could improve facilities for other modes while maintaining traffic operations. While the study limits outlined above were considered, the core of the operations and safety analysis focused on 16th Street NW from U Street to Arkansas Avenue. Higher level analysis of the various cross sections and operations indicated that this section was a core piece of the study area. This section of 16th Street NW contains all three cross section types: raised median, reversible lane and 4-lane through lanes. The development of preferred alternatives included identifying safety and facility needs for pedestrians and bicyclists along the corridor. The project also identified intersection-level improvement for pedestrian and bicycle comfort as well as traffic operations. Crash data was pivotal in highlighting safety concerns and opportunities for each of the alternatives. Safety data assessed the safety impacts of the reversible lane as well as safety opportunities for each alternative. Finally, the project sought to ensure all modifications would not impede neighborhood connectivity or drastically alter character of neighborhood. The development of the alternatives strived to ensure all recommended improvements enhanced neighborhood livability.
10 April 2013
Final Report
Evaluation Criteria
An evaluation based on safety, mobility, community and feasibility was used to help understand the impacts of potential alternatives. The safety and mobility categories evaluated the impacts of the alternative on each mode, while the community and feasibility criteria evaluated the impacts on the character of the area and whether construction and maintenance was realistic. dprovides a summary of each category and sub category for the evaluation criteria.
Table 1.
Evaluation Criteria for Breakout Projects
Category (in bold)/ Sub Description Criteria Safe Passages are the top priority for DDOT as described in the DDOT Action Agenda. Safety
The goal is to work towards zero transportation-related fatalities and to annually reduce injuries by 10%. As the modes most susceptible to injuries and fatalities, protection ought to be in place for bicycles and pedestrians. Many aspects of the built environment along the corridor impact pedestrian safety. 1 Factors that impact pedestrian safety as identified in the HSM includesegment type, operating speed, lighting, traffic volume, median width, and barriers. The safety of transit vehicles is a function of the level of friction with other users, particularly in the curbside through lane where transit vehicles mostly travel, and the number of maneuvers required for transit vehicles. Considerations for automobile safety include the presence and types of conflicts and required maneuvers for weaving, merging, and diverging. The HSM provides an approach for evaluating roadway safety based on crash modification factors (CMFs) for treatments such as presence of left-turn lanes, on street parking, and median width to enable a relative comparison across different alternatives.
Pedestrians Transit Automobiles
April 2013
Final Report
Category (in bold)/ Sub Description Criteria Mobility for all modes is an outcome of the Sustainable Living element of the Mobility for All Modes
DDOT Action Agenda. Sustainable Living speaks to the importance of effectively using the existing transportation infrastructure and being cautious with planning decisions that will influence mode choice among users. To the extent possible, walking should be prioritized for short (<1 mi) trips and cycling for medium distance (<3 mi) trips. Investments should favor expansion and enhancement of transit services. Lastly, auto congestion should be mitigated while simultaneously using transportation and land-use choices that encourage a non-auto dependent travel behavior. Transit travel time, ridership/throughput, and headway adherence are the primary performance measures considered as part of transit mobility. Transit vehicles in mixed traffic are subject to delay from traveling along the arterial which exists primarily at traffic signals, as well as delay from boarding/alighting at bus stops. Ridership/throughput is affected by the amount of bus service along the corridor, which is affected by (among other things) the ability to increase service. Any treatment that reduces delay for transit vehicles will improve its ability to maintain headways. Travel time, queuing, and vehicle throughput are the key performance measures th considered in the evaluation of auto mobility along the 16 Street corridor. Understanding how the alternatives impact lane utilization is also important for assessing auto mobility performance 16th Street NW is a unique corridor in that it accommodates not just regional trips but local trips across all modes of travel. It plays an integral role within the neighborhoods it borders. Important community functions include providing multimodal travel options, ability to access land uses off of the corridor, and contribution to the character and identity of the surrounding area. How do the alternatives impact mode choice and ability to travel along the corridor? How do each of the alternatives impact left turn options at the cross street intersections and the ability to access east and west at major cross streets? Will the modification enhance the surrounding environment? Does the alternative preserve the character and identity for the surrounding communities and neighborhoods? 16th Street NW is a corridor heavily used by auto users and in an area where parking is a substantial concern. How do the alternatives impact on-street parking along the corridor? While alternatives vary in performance, they also vary in terms of feasibility. Construction costs, time to implementation, and management /enforcement are additional factors to consider for a successful alternative to be chosen. How significant are the costs to construct the alternative? How long will the alternative take to be implemented? required at a broader level. Are there resources for the necessary enforcement and management for the alternative to be sustainable? How much of a burden does this place on DDOT? How great are the impacts if enforcement is not sufficient?
Transit
Automobiles
Community
Mode Choice Cross street access Character Impacts on Parking
Feasibility
Construction cost and implementation time Management/Enforcement Each of the alternatives has some degree of management and enforcement
April 2013
12
Section 3
Related Studies and Corridor Context
Final Report
Introduction
A number of transportation projects and studies have been undertaken within the study area in recent years, each with a unique geographic scope and focus. The previous studies and documents provide recommendations ranging from policies to
location-specific improvements. For example, the DC Transportation Vision Plan is a high-level policy document that identifies issues, goals, performance measures, and tools but does not address specific problem areas. The Districts Pedestrian and Bicycle Master Plans identify mode-specific issues by location within the study area but do not address specific solutions,and the Columbia Heights/Mount Pleasant Transportation Study provides the greatest level of detail and identifies site-specific solutions but only covers a limited portion of study area. This report synthesizes findings and recommendations from multiple reports to develop a comprehensive understanding of transportation needs and opportunities for improvement for the entire study area across all modes. Documents reviewed and summarized include the following: DC Transit Alternatives Analysis WMATA Study Priority Corridor Network Bicycle Master Plan Pedestrian Master Plan WMCOG Vision Plan District of Columbia Strategic Highway Safety Plan WMATA Regional Bus Study WMATA Guidelines for the Design and Placement of Transit Stops District of Columbia Transit Future Alternatives Analysis Zoning maps
Columbia Heights Transportation Study Mount Pleasant Transportation Study 14th Street Transportation Streetscape Study 15th Street NW Reconfiguration K Street Centerway EA and Preliminary Engineering DC Transportation Vision Plan and
April 2013
14
Final Report
Figure 2 illustrates the areas covered by the above studies, with the exception of those that cover the entire District of Columbia or the DC-MD-VA metro region. The area between M Street and Piney Branch Parkway is the most heavily studied; while there have been limited studies in other parts of the corridor. There have been few attempts to study the entire 16th Street corridor from a complete streets perspective. Although many previous studies have considered all or part of 16th Street, there is a need to synthesize the information provided by these studies and identify a cohesive set of solutions that can be readily implemented.
Recommendations from Previous Studies

Recommendations are often replicated in multiple studies, especially when the study areas overlap. The following table identifies the issues that exist on the 16th Street corridor and how frequently each has been identified. The matrix lists the recommendations that were found during the literature review by mode and indicates which studies are associated with that recommendation. The solid circle indicates that the recommendation was specifically stated in the study, and the hollow circle indicates that the general recommendations of the study provide implied support for a specific recommendation.
Previous Project and Studies Recommendation Summary TRAFFIC / PEDESTRIAN TRANSIT PARKING / BICYCLE th 14 St Transportation and Streetscape th 15 St Re-configuration th 16 St Metrobus Line Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan for National Capitol Brightwood Transportation Study Columbia Heights / Mt. Pleasant Study DC Bicycle Master Plan DC Neighborhood Circulation DC Pedestrian Master Plan DC Strategic Highway Safety Plan DC Transit Improvements DDOT Action Agenda K Street Transitway Mount Pleasant Transportation Study TBP Vision 1998 WMATA Guidelines for Transit Stops WMATA Priority Corridor Study WMATA Regional Bus Study - Recommendation made - Recommendation supported in principle
April 2013 15
Table 2.
Macomb St
Albemarle St
Av e
Wisconsin Ave
Lin ne an A
hA Uta
ve
W es te rn
ve
P St
Av e
30th St
Tilden St
Military Rd
M St
R St
le ve
la nd
A ka as br Ne
ve
kC
W at er s M ide as D sa r ch us et ts
Roc
Por ter
Inte
ac P ky
Cath
24th St
22nd St 21st St
20th St
a Bro
ch ran dB
ach use tts Ave
23rd St
23rd St
I St aA ve
van i
Ma ss
Pen
19th St
Ad am sM
nsy l
Walbridge Pl
ill R d
h ac Be
Wise Rd
Dr
Ches
Rd
Oregon A ve
tnut S
te 6 rsta
edra lA
&P
St
reek
28th St
otom
e t Av icu t c nne Co
Av e
27th St
ve
Calvert St
gl Klin eR
e st B We
D ach
r Flo ida e Av
K St
Q St
17th St
Ha
P St
17th St
mp s
I St
H St
hir e
ach use tts Ave
15th St
Ar
15th St
14th St
ka ns a
U St
Aspen St
sA ve
14th St
Missou ri Ave
Harvard St
R St
13th St
Euclid St
Ma ss
ng R
Ver mo
14th St
nt A v
Al as ka
Kalm Locust ia Rd Rd
Pa rk R
16th St
Decatur St
Av
nt Mou
t ant S leas
Av e
Co lo r
Mo rro w
Ne w
Harvard St
Dr
18th St
Bl ag de n
ode Rh nd Isla Ave
Euclid St
Euclid St
B ey Pin ch ran y Pk
lD rt a Po
ad o
Av e
Av e
13th St
n er st a E
e Av
a Florid
Columbia Rd
nr Mo
K St Mt Vernon Pl
M St
L St
Q St
Mis sou ri
5th St
I St
Av e
4th St 3rd St
ve ey A Jers New
4th St
Park P
5th St
Ave
6th St
5th St
rS Warde
5th St
Butternut St
I St
Flo rid a
2nd St
P St
H St
K St
1st St
Kennedy St
M St
T St
H:\projfile\11066 - 16th Street NW Corridor Study\gis\Map Template\CorridorOverview_11x17_1100scale.mxd
A ork wY Ne
oe
Spri
Ave
12th St 10th St 11th St V 10th St ermo 9th St 7th St
nt A v
ve Sherman A
Ka ns as
w Io
Av e
ve aA
ois Illin Av e
St
L St
Irving St
Street Centerlines Study Areas

Interstate Collector Local Principal Arterial Minor Arterial
ve
Park Rd
Georgia Ave
Pin
ey B
7th St
ran ch
Rd
n er st a E
e Av
Barry Pl
Roc k Cr C eek
Kennedy St
Upshur St
ode Rh nd Isla
Kenyo
Grant Cir
Bryant St
h Rd hurc
Ceda
n St
Ave ork wY Ne
Webster St
r St
Ne w
3rd St
North Capitol St
14th Street Multimodal Transportation and Streetscape Design Study 15h Street Reconfiguration DC Pedestrian Master Plan 16th Street Metrobus Line
Brightwood Transportation Study Columbia Heights/Mount Pleasant Transportation Study DC Neighborhood Circulation Study K Street Transitway Mount Pleasant Transportation Study
WMATA Priority Corridor Network Study
Ave
Ha
mp s
hir e
Av
Ka ns as
La ur
Av e
d ir R Bla
North Capitol St
el
ve Michigan A
North Capitol St
er st a E
e Av
St
Figure #: Corridor Overview K Street to Eastern Ave

Literature Review
0 550 1,100
2,200
1 inch = 2,167 feet
Feet
Final Report
As indicated in Table 2, there is substantial overlap between recommendations in the previous studies. However, none of the studies cover a comprehensive evaluation of the challenges and opportunities the 16th Street NW corridor faces. Many recommendations from the above studies pertain to areas on or around the 16th Street NW Corridor. The following major themes summarize the findings of many of the previous studies: Several geometrically complex intersections along the corridor call for reconfiguration and face operational issues. These intersections include: o 16th Street NW/Columbia Road/Harvard Street o 16th Street NW/15th Street/Irving Street o 16th Street NW/Park Road/Pine Street o 16th Street NW/U Street/New Hampshire Avenue Elimination or modification of the reversible lane. General improvements to pedestrian facilities and specific improvements to intersections identified as unsafe for pedestrians as identified by the Districts Pedestrian Master Plan. Maintenance of pavement markings, signs and signal heads. Addition of bicycle facilities. Evaluation and improvement of bus stop placement and amenities. Evaluation of need for increased transit service in the peak hours.
The themes and recommendations from previous studies are consistent and many overlap each other. Based on the above findings, the project team identified seven breakout projects to focus the operations analysis. These breakout projects included: Breakout Project #1: Reversible Lane Segment Breakout Project #2: 16th Street NW/Columbia Road NW/Harvard Road NW Breakout Project #3: 16th Street NW/15th Street NW/Irving Street Breakout Project #4: 16th Street NW/Park Road Breakout Project #5: 16th Street NW/Arkansas Avenue Breakout Project #6: 16th Street NW/Colorado Avenue/Blagden Avenue Breakout project #7: North End Parking
Each of these breakout projects is located within a 1.5 mile subsection of 16th Street NW between U Street and Arkansas Avenue. The operations analysis for the project focuses on the corridor within this subsection. Table 3 provides a summary of the breakout project descriptions and Figure 3 provides a map of the break out project locations.
April 2013 17
Final Report
Table 3.
Summary of Break-Out Project Descriptions

Modal Issue Addressed Auto Traffic Calming Transit Stops/ Waiting Areas Quality of Service Peds Facility Continuity Bicycles Facility Continuity
18
Operations
Reversible Lane Segment
The objective this breakout project is to conduct a detailed operational analysis of alternative typical sections for this section of the corridor. Concerns have been documented in previous studies about the reversible lane and more specifically, whether or not that space could be better used as a transit lane, on-street parking or for boulevard medians. The impact of the addition of a northbound left turn lane onto Park Road will be incorporated in the evaluation. The outcome of this project will influence the other intersection projects in this corridor (#2-5). The objective of this breakout project is to develop alternative concepts that normalize intersection geometry, reduce pavement area and improve users comfort and safety. The breakout project will evaluate how these intersections jointly function for autos, bicycles, pedestrians and transit. The combined operations at these four intersections are interrelated due to the proximity to one another and irregular geometric elements resulting from skewed approaches. This project addresses the joint intersection of 15th Street, 16th Street and Irving Street. There are deficiencies related to lane balance, merging movements, pedestrian signal timing (between both intersections), on-street parking on Irving Street and bus stop waiting areas. Alternative design concepts will be developed and evaluated to address deficiencies within the current ROW. The northbound left turn onto Park Road is currently accommodated with a right hand diverge that makes a jug-handle turn, although DDOT has plans to implement a separate left-turn lane at this location. The diverging turn creates a queuing issue on the westbound approach of Park Road. Additionally, there are opportunities to improve the pedestrian crossing of Pine Street which is currently a lengthy crossing at a shallow angle. The intersection of 16th Street and Arkansas Avenue has a high-speed downhill right turn movement creating an uncomfortable and potentially unsafe pedestrian crossing. A popular pedestrian route, indicated by a well beaten foot path in the grass, is not served by sidewalks on the south side of Arkansas. The safety concerns for pedestrians are exacerbated by limited sight distance for approaching right-turning vehicles for crossing pedestrians.
ColumbiaHarvard
15th/16th /Irving
Park Road
Arkansas Avenue
Blagden/ Colorado
This project will assess what measures can be used to discourage cut-through traffic by using traffic calming treatments. Instead of making a dog-leg maneuver through two signals, motorists continue southwest on Colorado Avenue and then get onto Blagden Avenue by making the two turns in a residential neighborhood.
North End Parking
Local residents have indicated a desire to restrict parking during the weekend due to congestion along the corridor yet there is a high demand for parking at certain of the weekend particularly related to church activity. This project will qualitatively assess the parking demand and availability on the north end of the 16th Street corridor and evaluate the feasibility of making adjustments to the parking restrictions.
April 2013
Crossings
Capacity
Parking
Safety
Safety
Safety
Reference
Name
Description
Circulation
RIGGS PL
MIT
S UM
LAMONT ST
KENYON ST
SWANN ST
RD
WILLARD ST
CORCORAN ST
CHURCH ST
TAYLOR ST
DE SALES ST
SEATON ST
QU AR
UPSHUR ST
HA
ONTARIO RD
O N
NE W
TA
RY
CH A
HARVARD ST
ST PL A IN
ST
SHEPHERD ST
IRVING ST
N CO
KILBOURNE PL
T EC
IC U
VE TA
MONROE ST
PL
CO
18TH ST
18 TH
IN
IO
S LE
ID
R TE
QU IN C
LO
N LA IE R PL
RA
ST
BL
18TH ST
AG
BL
DO
AG
AR
EN
DE
AV E
WEBSTER ST
HOBART ST
AV E
17TH ST
17TH ST
17TH ST
N ST
I ST
RIGGS PL
O ST
1
15TH ST
MOZART PL
2
HA RVARD ST
MO
PL UNT
EA S
AN T
ST
BR
OA K
VARNUM ST
17TH ST
PS
MOUNT PLEASANT ST
YL E
AV E
TE
P IN
HI RE
CRESTW OOD DR
TE
EUCLID ST
EY
KA
RD A BI M LU CO FUL LER ST
SPRIN G PL
PL
ST
BUCHANAN ST
OE
ON
R ID
ST
KR
NR
WT
ME
OA K
HIATT PL
MO
PA R
NE
OG
EN
ST
AS
AV E
15TH ST
CHURCH ST
M ST
14TH ST
OTIS PL OAK ST
PL
SHEPHERD ST
RANDOLPH ST
UPSHUR ST
RD
RY
QUINCY ST
FAIRMONT ST
KENYON ST
BELMONT ST
CLIFTON ST
Q ST
R ST
U ST
K ST
W ST
L ST
S ST
T ST
V ST
M ST
N ST
BL
AR
BL
CO
AG DE N
LO
BEAC H
RA D O
DR
RO
SS
SPR
ON TA VE
ALLISON ST
RIGGS ST
IN G
RM
P ST
PER
VE
WALLACH PL
EUCLID ST
GIRARD ST
TAYLOR ST
14TH ST
OTI S
15TH ST
SWANN ST
HOLMEAD PL
A OW
DR
AG
BE
AV E
H AC
DR
PO PL
SYC
AM
OR
TU
ES T
DECATUR ST
E AV
LI P
NS
CRITTENDEN ST
IAN
ST
PL
R FL O ID A AVE
LO
BR
CR ES
WO
17TH ST
RA
BEE KM AN
CH AN
OD T
BE
PL
CE NT PL
ER
LM ON
RD
OW
PK
16TH ST
NS
TS T
5
AR KA
EU CL ID ST
GIRARD ST
CH APIN ST
BELM ONT ST
CLIFTO N ST
MO NR OE ST
R ED W O D O TE
EN
ST
17
MIL IT AR Y
ED
RD
HO LLY ST
M AD IS
6
KE
O N ST
RD
YP
NN
16TH ST
DR
LONGFELLOW ST
MONTAGUE ST
LN
CRITTENDEN ST
BUCHANAN ST
MADISON ST
ST
WHITTIER ST
WHITTIER PL
E NS
DECATUR ST
RP E
I AV
T EV
IA RD
TH O
TS
15TH ST
NC
SO
OG L E
FOR
HOLLY ST
HEMLOCK ST
KAL M
MIS
U ST
MA
LE E
AV E
RD
UR
HE
15TH ST
GA TE
C H RD
GERANIUM ST
ST
PIN EY
ER
B RA N
LU Z
ON
H 15 T
PL
RD
NO
RT
HG
AT E
RD
JUNIPER ST
IRIS ST
O SE
14TH ST
HAMILTON ST JEFFERSON ST
LO C
14TH ST
DAHLIA ST
IM
NICHOLSON ST
RITTENHOUSE ST
TEWKESBURY PL
14TH ST
TUCKERMAN ST
UNDERWOOD ST
KENNEDY ST
SOMERSET PL
FARRAGUT ST
INGRAHAM ST
SHERIDAN ST
GALLATIN ST
EMERSON ST
ASPEN ST
DELAFIELD PL
FLORAL ST
IO
PL
DR
13TH ST
13TH ST
13TH ST
Legend
Study Roadway
Regional Locato n o f Corridor
Breakout Project Locations

(1) Reversible Lane Segment (4) Park Road (2) Columbia-Harvard Intersection (5) Arkansas Avenue (3) 15th/16th/ Irving Street (6) Blagden-Colorado
Corridor Project Locato ns K Street to Eastern Avenue

Street Centerlines
Interstate Principal Arterial Minor Arterial Collector Local
Breakout Project Locato ns

DECEMBER 3, 2010
Coordination Efforts
(1) (2) (3) (4) U Street Reconstruction Spring Place HAWK Walter Reed BRAC Relocation Parking Consistency Along Corridor (Not Shown)
0
No Warrante s o f a ny sor t, including accuracy, tnes s or merchantability accompany this product.
550
1,100
2,200
1 inch = 1,100 feet
Feet
H:\projfile\11066 - 16th Street NW Corridor Study\gis\Map Figures\DataCollectionPlan_CorridorOverview_11x17_1100scale.mxd
FERN ST
A W
AV E
13 T H
AI N
JO NQ U IL
E AV
XA
OR
AD
13TH PL
AV E
ST
CO L
VAN BUREN ST
L 14 TH P
3
ASPEN DR
AL
KA
PR
AS
EA
ST
N R
AV
VE
YC
RB
17TH ST
JO
EN
17TH ST
ST
TE
TA M
DR
S HE RR IL
TH
T 17
AR
YL E
AV E
MO R R O W
ST
AC
SP
ST
TE
ST
AR L N
NO R
PO
C OR HI D
TH
AL RT
PRIM R
PO
RO XA NN
MY
AL RT
L DR
RT L T ES
D OS E R
ST
D R
A RD
Section 4 Existing Conditions
Final Report
Introduction
As outlined in the previous section, the focus of the operations analysis is on the subset area between Arkansas Avenue and U Street. due to the complexity of the challenges and areas this corridor traverses and the location of breakout projects identified from previous studies, the existing conditions analysis contained in this report focuses on the 16th Street NW Corridor from U Street to Arkansas Avenue as a representative sub-section of the whole corridor. Breakout Project #1: Reversible Lane Segment Breakout Project #2: 16th Street NW/Columbia Road NW/Harvard Road NW Breakout Project #3: 16th Street NW/15th Street NW/Irving Street Breakout Project #4: 16th Street NW/Park Road Breakout Project #5: 16th Street NW/Arkansas Avenue Breakout Project #6: 16th Street NW/Colorado Avenue/Blagden Avenue Breakout project #7: North End Parking
Roadway Cross Section

The cross section of 16th Street varies between four lanes with peak hour on-street parking restrictions (one travel lane per direction during off-peak periods with adjacent on-street parking), five lanes with on-street parking on one side (two travel lanes per direction), five lanes with a reversible lane and peak hour on-street parking restrictions (two to three lanes per direction), and six-lanes with on-street parking (two travel lanes per direction).
April 2013
21
BREAK OUT PROJECT #1:

WI SE R
Typical Sections, Option "A"

16TH ST
DR
H AC BE
1
D YR AR LIT
MI
MORRO W
DR
14TH ST
CO LO RA DO
AV E
BL AG DE N
AR KA NS AS
LE RD KLING
RD LL MI
ST ANT EAS T PL N U O
S AM AD
14TH ST
VE LA
RD
MS MI LL
RA ED TH CA
AD A
15TH ST
M LU CO
A BI
RD
HARVARD ST
EUCLID ST
KENY ON ST
SPRIN G RD
UPSHUR ST
AV E
CRITTENDEN ST
A W IO
E AV
13TH ST
PA RK R
DECATUR ST
AV E
ASPEN ST
VAN BUREN ST
KENNEDY ST
AL AS KA
AV E
17 TH ST
ExistingConditions
16thStreetCorridorStudy Washington,D.C
FullCorridorOverviewofCrossSections: KStreettoEasternAve
.
Legend
District Boundary Principal Arterial Minor Arterial Collector Local Study Roadway
Data collected between September 27andOctober3,2010. H:\projfile\11066 - 16th Street NW Corridor Study\gis\Map Figures\Figure4_LitReview_StudyAreas_11x17_2200scale.mxd
ProjectedStateplane CoordinateSystem: MarylandFIPS1900 BaseDataSource:DCGIS NoWarrantiesofanysort, includingaccuracy,fitness ormerchantability accompanythisproduct.
HARVARD ST
IRVING ST
Street Centerlines
FUNCTIONAL
Interstate
CALVERT ST
Final Report
Intersections
The 16th Street NW corridor has 17 signalized intersections from U Street to Arkansas Avenue. Intersections along this section of the corridor have varying geometric characteristics such as skewed approaches, close spacing and/or intersections with more than four legs. This provides challenges for safety and operations. Figure 5 provides aerial depictions of a few of the intersections that have these characteristics along the corridor, including: Arkansas Avenue/16th Street NW has an approximately 45 degree skewed approach from the northeast. This allows vehicles to make the northbound right turn at high speeds. Columbia Road NW/Harvard Street NW/Mount Pleasant NW/16th Street NW is a multi-legged intersection that creates circulation issues for all modes of travel. There are missing crosswalks and narrow pedestrian refuges. 15th Street NW is a one-way street that intersects Irving Street/16th Street NW at a skewed angle from the southeast direction. A significant amount of this traffic is through traffic that continues on to 16th Street NW. Bell Multicultural High School and Lincoln Middle School are on the north east corner of the intersection generates a high volume of pedestrians.
Figure 5 Aerial of Columbia Road NW/Harvard Street NW/Mount Pleasant NW/ 16th Street NW (left) and Arkansas Avenue/16th Street NW (Right)
April 2013
23
Final Report
Vehicular Operations
TRAFFIC COUNTS AND TRAVEL SPEEDS Twenty-four hour volume and speed counts were collected at four locations along 16th Street NW to gain an understanding of the vehicular characteristics throughout the corridor. Figure 6 illustrates the average weekday and weekend hourly and daily volumes along the corridor. The traffic volume profiles in Figure 6 show the following trends: The peak vehicular flow direction in the morning is in the southbound direction and the peak vehicular flow direction in the afternoon is in the northbound direction. The a.m. peak hour, peak-direction experiences more vehicle demand than the p.m. peak hour, peak direction. Traffic volume is substantially lower south of U Street compared to the volumes in the northern sections during the peak hours. Afternoon peak period northbound traffic volumes increase steadily along the corridor and increases significantly when 15th Street NW merges onto 16th Street NW at Irving Street NW. The highest volumes are documented north of Arkansas Avenue, where there is a four lane cross section and a raised median. LANE UTILIZATION In addition to volume and speed, lane utilization was evaluated for the reversible section. Vehicular tube counts and video were utilized to determine which lanes vehicles traveled on during the peak periods. In Figure 7 and Figure 8, the lane utilization is shown in vehicles/5 mins for the a.m. and p.m. peak hour. The graph shows that the curb lane has a significantly higher utilization in both the a.m. and p.m. peak hours. In some cases, twice as many vehicles were observed in the curb land as the inside lane.
April 2013
24
WOODLEY RD
PROSPECT ST
VAN NESS ST
MACOMB ST
ALBEMARLE ST
TILDEN ST
K ST PE NN SY LVA NIA AV E
VI RG IN IA
CR EE K

66
28TH ST
& SA PO CH TO US M AC ET PK TS Y AV E
WA TE RS ID E
C LE V
Mon
Tue
Wed
Thu
Fri Sat ST 30TH
BRO AD
MILITARY RD
LIN NE A
EL A
45000 40000 35000 30000 25000 20000 15000 10000 5000 0
M ST
33RD ST
SB
SB
NCH RD
NS CO WIS
VE IN A
NB
Sun
45000 40000 35000 30000 25000 20000 15000 10000 5000 0
34TH ST
MCKINLEY ST
Q ST
35TH ST #1: Daily Traffic Volume for Week of ST 9/27 34TH (vehicles per day)
GARFIELD ST
PORTER ST
#2: Daily Traffic Volume for Week of 9/27 (vehicles per day)
RD NO RE
VE TA ICU CT E NN CO
E DA AV NEVA
AV E
AV E
R ST
BRA
N D
RESERVOIR RD
45000 40000 35000 30000 25000 20000 15000 10000 5000 0
45000 40000 35000 30000 25000 20000 15000 10000 5000 0
45000 40000 35000 30000 25000 20000 15000 10000 5000 0
NB
NE BR AS KA
NB A VE SB
AH UT
E AV
W ESNB T SB ER N
NB
AV E
SB*
Mon
Tue
Wed
Thu
Fri
Sat
Sun
Mon
Tue
Wed
Thu
Fri
Sat
Sun
Mon
Tue
Wed
Thu
Fri
Sat
Sun
Mon
Tue
Wed
Thu
*Approximated where data missing
Fri
Sat
Sun
ST TNUT CHES
AV E
P ST
DR
27TH ST
22ND ST
H ST PE NN SY LVA NIA I ST AV E
21ST ST
4 am 8 am 4 pm 12 pm
MA 8 pm SS AC HU SE TT SA VE
4 am
8 am
4 pm
12 am
4 pm
8 pm
12 pm
12 pm
20TH ST
Sat
Sun
Midweek Avg.
19TH ST
RD
Sat
Sun
Midweek Avg.
AD AM
12 pm
12 pm
12 am
4 pm
8 pm
12 am
12 am
4 pm
8 pm
12 am
SM
IL L
RD
HARVARD ST
G ST
I ST
Q ST
NE W
IRVING ST
18TH ST
BL A
BE AC H
G DE N AV E
Sat
Sun
Midweek Avg.
Sat
Sun
Midweek Avg.
Sat
DR
MORRO W DR
U ST
CRITTENDEN ST
DECATUR ST
H ST
15TH ST
VAN BUREN ST
L ST SA CH US ET TS AV E
MISSO URI AV E
HARVARD ST
EUCLID ST
13TH ST
MA S
10TH ST
SA CH US ET I ST I ST TS AV 12 am E K ST K ST MT VERNON PL
L ST
PARK RD
BUTTERNUT ST
4 pm
12 pm
12 am
12 am
12 am
12 pm
12 pm
AV E
AVE
6TH ST
FL OR IDA
P ST
MICH IGAN
5TH ST
Sat
Sun
Midweek Avg.
M ST
G ST
3RD ST
Q ST
MA S
R ST
4TH ST

395
JE NEW
Y RSE
AVE
4TH ST
Sat
Sun
Average
PARK PL
5TH ST
IL
NE W
5TH ST
12 pm
HA MP
Sat
Sun
Midweek Avg.
Sat
Sun
Midweek Avg.
Sat
Sun
SH IR EA VE
KA NS AS
AV E
3RD ST
Street Centerlines
Interstate Principal Arterial Minor Arterial Collector Local Study Roadway
1 2 3 4 5
Location #1: North of K Street Location #2: South of Euclid Street Location #3: South of Military Road Location #4: Walter Reed Location #5: South of Eastern Avenue
Full Corridor Overview K Street to Eastern Ave

October 2010 Traffic Volume Profiles

Data collected between September 27 and October 3, 2010.

H:\projfile\11066 - 16th Street NW Corridor Study\gis\Map Figures\Figure4_CorridorVolumeProfiles_11x17_2200scale.mxd
1,000
2,000
4,000
1 inch = 2,200 feet
Feet
12 pm
12 am
4 pm
8 pm
4 am
8 am
4 am
8 am
4 am
8 am
4 am
4 pm
8 pm
4 pm
8 pm
8 am
4 pm
8 pm
Midweek Avg.
8 pm
4 am
8 am
ER ST WARD
SH IR EA VE
MIS S
8TH
2200 2000 1800 1600 1400 1200 1000 800 ST 600 400 200 0
CRITTENDEN ST
#1: NB Volume Profile (vehicles per hr) 12TH ST

10TH ST 9TH ST 7TH ST 11TH ST
NG RD
VE RM ON TA VE
G ST
NE W
HA MP
AV E
OU RI A V
2000 VE RM 1800 10TH ST ON 1600 TA VE 1400 1200 1000 800 600 400 200 0
SPR I
2200
#2: NB Volume Profile (vehicles per hr)
AVE SHERMAN
A W IO
E AV
13TH ST
#3: NB Volume Profile (vehicles per hr) A AVE GEORGI2200

INO ILL IS E AV
2000 1800 1600 1400 1200 1000 800 600 400 200 0
KA NS AS
O IS L IN
E AV
2200 2000 1800 1600 1400 1200 1000 800 600 400 200 0

PIN E
ASPEN ST
14TH ST
VE RM ON TA VE
15TH ST
14TH ST
AV E
14TH ST
AL A
KALM IA RD LOCU ST R D
PA RK RD
AV E
2
VE IDA A FLOR
AV E
AR KA NS AS
VAN BUREN ST
17 T
17TH ST
P ST
17TH ST
T NT S ASA PLE T N MOU
HA MP
BE ST R WE HD C A T BE EAS
Sun
Midweek CH AAvg.
DR
SH IR E
CO LO RA DO
ST
16TH ST
5
N ER ST A E
SK A
AV E
E AV
YB
RA NC HR D
A BL
IR
RD
2200 2000 1800 1600 1400 VE 1200 N A 1000 R E 800 ST 600 EA 400 200 0
8 pm
4 am
8 am
4 am
8 am
4 am
8 am
2200 2000 1800 24TH 1600 1400 23RD ST 1200 1000 800 600 400 200 0
#1: SB Volume Profile (vehicles per hr)

ST
23RD ST
2200 2000 1800 1600 1400 1200 1000 800 600 400 200 0

SHOR EHAM DR
CALVERT ST
CO LU MB IA
WALBRIDGE PL
2200 2000 1800 1600 1400 1200 1000 800 600 400 200 0
2200 2000 1800 1600 1400 1200 1000 800 600 400 200 0
RO CK
M AS
#4: SB Volume Profile (vehicles per hr) OREG ON AVE
2200 2000 1800 1600 1400 WI 1200 SE 1000 R800 D 600 400 200 0
VE AA ID OR FL
EI OD RH SLA E AV ND
DR AL RT DR PO L H TA RT OR NO P
EUCLID ST
FULLER ST
EI OD RH SLA E AV ND
EUCLID ST
ST OE NR MO
WY NE VE KA OR
PARK RD
EI OD RH
KENNEDY ST
BARRY PL
RD RCH CHU EEK K CR ROC
SLA E AV ND
WY NE
ST BRYANT
O KENY
VE KA OR
N ST
R ST CEDA
UPSHUR ST
Final Report
Figure 7
Lane Utilization for the AM Peak Hour North of Park Road
Figure 8
Lane Utilization Graph for the PM Peak Hour North of Park Road
TRAFFIC OPERATIONS Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) intersection operations analysis was completed for key signalized intersections along the corridor. The key intersections were selected as a sample set of typical
April 2013 26
Final Report
intersections within the study area. In addition, critical intersections, such as Harvard Road, Columbia Road, and Irving Street, were also selected for analysis. Table 4 provides a summary of the traffic operation results. Table 4. Summary of Traffic Operations at Key Intersections v/c Ratio AM PM 0.88 0.69 0.59 0.83 0.70 1.04 0.66 0.62 0.82 0.70 0.63 0.49 0.77 0.64 LOS AM E A B B C B C PM C D F B B A B
Location on 16th Street NW U Street Harvard Road Columbia Road Irving Street Park Road Spring Road Arkansas Avenue
As shown in Table 4, peak period analysis for indicates that a majority of the intersections operate within capacity (v/c ratio below 1.0) and a LOS D or lower. The series of signalized intersections at the Harvard Road/Columbia Road/16th Street area is a complex location within the corridor. This is a key reason why it was identified as a breakout project. However, due to the intersections complex geometry, signal spacing, and travel demand, traditional HCM analysis methodologies cannot effectively analyze traffic operations. ON-STREET PARKING On-street parking is restricted in the curbside lanes during the peak hours along the corridor. Parking is also permitted in the curbside lanes during peak hours, but is restricted to areas in the non-peak direction. The restricted parking eliminates approximately 377 parking spaces along the corridor from U Street to Arkansas Avenue during the peak hours. Parking is only available during the peak hours south of U Street. Parking is available in the a.m. peak hour on the east side of 16th Street NW and in the p.m. peak hour on the west side of 16th street NW. Figure 9 depicts an overview of the restricted parking areas and the parking available in the a.m. and p.m. peak hours.
April 2013
27
16th Street NW Study: Available Parking in the AM and PM Peak Hours
November 2012
Belmont St
16th St
nt ce es r C
Pl
ws Ct St Matthe
ode Rh nd I s la Ave
r tt Ci Sco
Ma ss
ach use t
H ts A ighlan dT ve er
17th St
k Bee
ma
l nP
W St
a id or l F
e Av
M St
4
17th St
V St
v ut A cti c nne Co
9
L St
Ver mo nt Ave
Seaton St
12
8
U St
6
K St
K St
2
5
Willard St
Caroline St
10
17th St
8
T St
I St
v ut A cti c nne Co
Ave
sh ire
9
Swann St
H St
Ha mp
Jackson Pl
Madison Pl
Ne w
2
S St
6
Riggs Pl
10
Temple Gdns
Pennsylvania Ave
G St G St
11 6
R St
F St
West Executive Ave
East Executive Ave
15th St
F St
Rd
4
Corcoran St
15th St
State Pl
8
Q St
5 3
Church St
E St
Sou t
hE xec
Church St
D St
Ellips e Rd
4
P St
10 6
O St
N St
St Matthews Ct
Bataan St
16th St
Ma ss a chu
se t
ts A ve
ve dA lan s I ode Rh
N St
Scott Cir
Ma ss ach u
17th St
16th St
Total Peak Hour Parking:

AM- 73 Parking Spaces PM- 119 Parking Spaces
16th St
se t
ts A ve
Peak Hour Parking Availability

AM Peak Hour Parking PM Peak Hour Parking
Number of Parking Spaces
250
500
1,000 Feet
Note: Parking North of NW W Street is reastricted in the AM and PM peak hours.
utiv
se lip El
eA ve
Ver mo nt
8
Av e
15th St
Rd ario Ont
Ave rida Flo 3
De Sales St
16
e e
Final Report
Transit Activity
PRIORITY BUS CORRIDOR WMATA identifies the 16th Street, Georgia Avenue/7th Street, Rhode Island Avenue, and Massachusetts Avenue corridors as priority bus corridors, meaning that these corridors serve a high volume of bus passengers and are slated for service improvements designed to enhance bus passenger travel times and bus reliability. An express limited-stop service along the 16th Street NW corridor has recently been deployed and transit ridership has increased steadily. The award of the TIGER grant for implementing transit preferential treatments along the bus priority corridor presents an opportunity for implementing a series of corridor improvements, increasing transit reliability, potentially decreasing auto trips, and strengthening the relationships between DDOT and WMATA. Such improvements include queue jump lanes, bus stop improvements, and transit signal priority. BUS STOPS There are bus stops spaced nearly every 1,000 feet (approximately every two blocks), compliant with WMATAs bus guidelines of being spaced every 656-1,968 feet. Every bus stop along the corridor has a loading capacity for one bus at a time. Many of the bus stops along the corridor have bus shelters and provide sidewalk space for waiting passengers. There are four WMATA bus routes that serve the corridor, three of which are local and one is an express route. As discussed earlier, the corridor provides an average bus frequency of approximately 27 buses in the a.m. peak hour and 15 buses in the p.m. peak hour. It is generally desirable to have a minimum bus frequency of 25 to 30 buses an hour to support a transit only lane. Figure 10 shows a graph of the existing bus frequency by hour and Table 5 provides the schedule of the four routes along the corridor. Figure 10 clearly shows that bus frequencies are influenced by direction. While the a.m. peak hour average bus frequency is 27 buses per hour, the graph clearly shows the bus frequency in the southbound direction far exceed that average. The same is true for the p.m. peak hour only the bus frequencies are higher in the northbound direction.
April 2013
29
Final Report
Figure 10 Existing Bus Frequency

TABLE 5. EXISTING BUS SCHEDULE Weekday Time of Day Bus Runs Bus Route S1 S2 S4 S9 Southbound AM 5:47-9:22 4:0911:47 4:2611:57 6:3010:00 PM 12:0311:33 12:1311:52 3:06-6:12 Northbound AM 4:4211:46 4:5811:47 7:00-9:18 PM 3:58-7:02 12:0211:51 12:0311:39 3:00-7:00
April 2013
30
X1 X3
ADM MOR-U ST LINK 98
BENNING ROAD
A DE
R LJ
S HI
SIXTEENTH STREET S2 S4
16TH ST-POT PARK S1
EAST CAP-CARDOZO 96 97
WILSON HI SCH
90 92 93
W45 W46
! ( ! ! ( ( ! ( ! (
H2 H3 H4
! (
,3 ,33 2 1,3 D3
! ( ! ! ( (
CH
H5 MOR S DAM H1 A-A PK PLE T M POT D AN OKL BRO
! (
! (
! (
U ST-GARFIELD
MOR H5
KR
D-B
RO
T SAN LEA P T N H MOU I SC NH O S L WI
OK LA N
W46 W45
DH
42
8H
MT PLEA-ADAMS
PA R
! (
! ( ! (
! ( ! (
! ( ! (
! (
! ( ! (
! (
! ( U Street ! ( ! ( ! (
CROSSTOWN
CR O ST OS
Irving Street
K PAR
H2 H3 H4
RD-
B RO
A ND OKL
H8 H
! (
N W
! (
! (
! (
! ! ((
! (( !
! (
! (
! (
SIXTEENTH STREET S2 S4
DEAL JR HI SCH
! ( ! ( ! (
D31,32,33,34
! (
! (
16TH ST-POT PARK S1
! (
! ( ! (
H:\projfile\11066 - 16th Street NW Corridor Study\gis\Map Figures\Figure_StudyArea_11x17_2200scale.mxd
! Street ( Irving ! ( ! (
Bus Line
! (
Ar
! (
! (
ka n
! (
! (
sa s
! ( ! (
! (
! (
Av en
! (
14TH STREET
16TH ST-POT PARK S1
! (
52 53 54 X1 X3
! (
ue
CROSSTOWN DEAL JR HI SCH
H2 H3 H4 D31,32,33,34
Regional Locato n o f Corridor
Full Corridor Overview K Street to Eastern Ave

MT PLEA-ADAMS MOR H5 PARK RD-BROOKLAND H8 H9 SIXTEENTH STREET S2 S4 WILSON HI SCH W45 W46
ADM MOR-U ST LINK 98 BENNING RD-H ST X2 BENNING ROAD
No Warrante s o f a ny sor t, including accuracy, tnes s or merchantability accompany this product.
Bus Services and Stops

! ( ! (
! ( ! (
BROOKLAND-POT PK H1
500
1,000
Feet
Final Report
Further analysis of transit operations along the corridor determined the existing bus loading area, bus stop, and mixed traffic lane capacity and the bus lane speed. This analysis was completed using methods from the Transit Cooperative Research Program (TCRP) Report 100: The Transit Capacity and Quality of Service Manual (TCQSM). The TCQSM was used to assess the bus capacity of the corridor. This was done for the AM and PM peak hours at 16th Street NW/Columbia Road, 16th Street NW/Irving Street and 16th Street NW/ Spring Road NW. These locations were chosen because they experience high pedestrian activity, experience congestion and all four of the existing services use these stops. A summary of the equations, methods, and results of the TCQSM analysis can be found in Table 6. Table 6. Summary of TCQSM Analysis Results
During the PM peak hour, bus bunching was observed in the field. This creates poorer headways and makes the bus capacity more sensitive to minor changes in traffic since the corridor is already so close to capacity. Note, the above TCQSM analysis focused on the WMATA bus service along the corridor. There are additional bus services that utilize the 16th Street NW corridor including MTA commuter buses and Montgomery County transit services.
Pedestrian Facilities and Activity

The District Pedestrian Master Plan indicates segments of the 16th Street NW corridor as pedestrian deficient areas, areas with sidewalk gaps, missing crosswalks and safety challenges for pedestrians. The District Pedestrian Master Plan also identifies 16th Street NW as a Pedestrian Priority corridor; there is substantial pedestrian activity at several segments and intersections throughout the Corridor that do not have appropriate pedestrian facilities. The corridor generally has sidewalk space running along either side of it with additional sidewalk at most intersections that provide standing room for pedestrians. Sidewalk widths vary along the corridor. The
April 2013 32
Final Report
southern section has sidewalk widths that vary from 7 feet to 18 feet while the northern section varies from 8 feet to 16 feet. Volumes of over 700 pedestrians per hour were found at 15th Street NW/16th Street NW/Irving Street in the a.m. and p.m. peak hours. Similarly, Volumes of over 400 pedestrians per hour were found at Harvard Street NW/Columbia Road NW in the a.m. and p.m. peak hours. Volumes of over 200 pedestrians per hour were found at 16th Street NW/Columbia Road NW in the a.m. and p.m. peak hours. Field observations support that the skewed crossings and complex geometry are challenges for pedestrian mobility at the Mount Pleasant Street NW/ Columbia Road NW/ Harvard Street NW/16 th Street NW intersection. In addition, it was observed that high pedestrian activity at the Mount Pleasant Street NW /16th Street NW intersection results in vehicular congestion for northbound left turning vehicles off of 16th Street NW onto Argonne Place and Mount Pleasant Street NW.
Bicycle Activity
The study area accommodates bicycle commute trips, with the neighborhoods of Mount Pleasant, Adams Morgan, and Columbia Heights experiencing some of the highest percentage bicycle-commute trips in the District. This level of bicycle activity is attributed to the north-south directness and proximity of the study area to downtown and the existing bicycle facilities and signed routes on 14th Street NW, 13th Street NW, Massachusetts Avenue NW, Rhode Island Avenue NW, R Street NW, and the Rock Creek Park Trail (as documented in the Districts Bicycle Master Plan). The Bicycle Master Plan calls for future bicycle lanes, on-road separated bicycle facilities, and multi-use trails on numerous additional study area arterial and collector streets, specifically, 14th, 15th, 16th, and 17th Streets. Additionally, a significant number of bicycle crashes in the District occurred in the 16th Street Corridor project area, particularly in the southern portion near downtown. There is currently no dedicated bike lane or shared transit lane for bicyclists at any point along the 16 th Street NW corridor. Field observations confirm that while there is not a dedicated bike lane along the corridor, some bicyclists still use the corridor. Approximately 40 to 50 bicyclists an hour were counted during the peak hours at the southern end of the corridor while less than 10 bicyclists an hour were counted at the north end of the corridor. Bicyclists have been primarily observed riding mixed with traffic due to the lack of dedicated facilities. There are parallel streets that have bike lanes such as 14th Street NW, 15th Street NW and 17th Street NW. These bike lanes, however, are discontinuous on 14th Street NW and 17th Street NW.
April 2013 33
Final Report
Due to the high presence of regional trips along the corridor and the high demand during the peak periods, a person throughput analysis developed a better understanding of the total person throughput demand of the corridor. Person-throughput is a value that represents the number of people that traverse a single point on 16th Street NW in a one-hour period. The fundamental unit of measure for this analysis is a person because automobiles are insufficient in estimating demand due to their limited occupancy and the presence of car-pools and buses. This approach was developed to estimate the existing through-capacity on 16th Street NW which is mode-neutral.
Corridor Person Throughput

The existing person-throughput was calculated by multiplying the number of vehicles counted by the average occupancy of each type of vehicle. While the saturation flow rate of a five lanes on an urban arterial under ideal conditions could be calculated using methodologies from the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM), direct measurements were used in this analysis to determine the maximum capacity of the existing facilities. Traffic counts were conducted on October 5, 2010 during typical weekday peakhours at two locations: north of Park Road and south of Spring Road, on 16th Street NW. The approaching volumes from each of these intersections were further broken down on a lane-by-lane basis. Based on the maximum values observed in each lane under various conditions, the following assumptions were made about the maximum possible vehicle-throughput for lanes under various conditions. Table 7.
Assumption Max Vehicles PHPL (non-curb) Max Autos PHPL w/ Peak Bus Activity Max Autos PHPL w/ Off-Peak Bus Activity Max Vehicle PHP2L Assumed Right Turns PHPL Per Hour, Per Lane
Assumptions for Vehicle Throughput

Description This is the maximum number of vehicles observed in a permanent or reversible through-lane (excluding curb lanes). This value is the maximum number of autos observed in a curb-lane during a time period with peak bus activity. The frequency of buses blocking the curb lane makes this value much less than that in a typical through-lane. This value is the maximum number of autos observed in a curb-lane during a time period with moderate bus activity (non-peak direction). This is the maximum observed number of vehicles using the reversible and inner through-lane. The marginal increase in capacity is less than a full through-lane. Excluding a few key locations, this value was assumed as the average number of vehicles that would need to be in a curb-lane to make a right-turn. Value 875
350
400 1,565 50
Average vehicle occupancy assumptions were also calculated based on the results of the National Household Travel Survey. The data provided by the NHTS for Washington, DC allowed for the calculation of average vehicle occupancy for home-work auto trips from 7:00-9:00 a.m. and 4:00-6:00 p.m. on weekdays. These calculations indicated that the average occupancy for a private automobile was 1.06 in
April 2013 34
Final Report
the a.m. peak hour and 1.39 in the p.m. peak hour. The data also indicated that the average occupancy for a bus was 45 people in the peak hours. Figure 12 provides a graphical representation of person throughput and summarizes the steps of the person throughput calculations.
Figure 12 Steps for calculating existing person throughput demand

Based on the information in Figure 12, the person throughput for transit can be calculated along 16th Street NW. Because transit adheres to regular schedules, it is predictable and the scheduled service is used to estimate transit use on the corridor. The 16th Street NW corridor is served by four MetroBus routes (S1, S2, S4, S9) and two MTA Commuter Bus routes (915, 929). The person-throughput analysis assumes 27 buses in the peak hours based on the summary of schedule information available from WMATA and MTA Maryland. The results included the existing demand for the total person through traffic in the northbound and southbound direction during the peak period. Table 8 below summarizes the existing demand from the total person throughput analysis. Table 8. Summary of Existing Person-Throughput Demand
Peak Hour Person Throughput AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Northbound
1,137
Southbound
3,746
Total
4,884
Northbound
3,625
Southbound
1,561
Total
5,186
Safety Analysis
A safety analysis was conducted on the corridor from U Street to Arkansas Avenue. The safety analysis included a crash history analysis as well as mapping the crash history along the corridor based on type
April 2013
35
Final Report
and severity. The historical crash data was provided by DDOT and compiled by KAI. The crash data consisted of crashes from the past five years (2006-2010) along the corridor. A total of 820 crashes were observed along the 16th Street NW corridor over a five year period. Figure 13 summarizes the yearly crash frequency trends along the corridor. Figure 14 indicates there were no fatal injuries along the study corridor over the five year period and shows where the severity and crash frequencies are the greatest along the corridor. Figure 15 maps the crash type at key intersections along the corridor.
9/6/1900
7/18/1900
5/29/1900
4/9/1900
2/19/1900
1/0/1900 6/28/1905 6/29/1905 6/30/1905 7/1/1905 7/2/1905 Fatal/Injury
Property Damage Only PDO
Figure 13 Annual frequency of crashes on 16th Street NW, 2006-2010
April 2013
36
HARVARD ST
U ST
EUCLID ST
N PI EY
17TH ST
NE W
FULLER ST
1
HA M PS HI RE AV E
3
AVE
10
11
12
S LEA NT P MOU
13
A NT
14
ST
CH AN BR
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
R FLO
Y PK
I DA
16TH ST
15TH ST
AR KA NS
AS AV E
EUCLID ST
Severity by Location
Location on Corridor 1. U Street 2. V Street 3. Florida Avenue/ W Street 4. Belmont Street 5. Crescent Place 6. Kalorama Road 7. Euclid Street 8. Fuller Street 9. Harvard Street
T H S VER 10. 10T MO NT AV E
Severity by Location
Property Damage Only 49 27 41 15
EUCLID ST
Injured Persons 21 20 14 7 11 4 12
11TH ST
VE IDA A FLOR
14TH ST
Total
COLUMBIA RD
Location on Corridor 12. 13. 14.

IRVING ST
Injured Persons 24 9 1 10 11
GR D
Property Damage Only 60 25 1 37 27 20 17 21 22 21 14 557

E GIA AV GEOR
KA N SA S AV E
Total 84 34 2
13TH ST
70 47 55 22
HARVARD ST
Irving Street Lamont Street Pine Street Park Road

S OE NR MO
15. 16. 17. 18. 19.
47 38
UPSHUR ST
RD RK PA
16 10 42 27 30 29 6
27 14 54 42 45 37
Monroe Street Newton Street Meridian Place Oak Street Spring Place N Spring Road
PARK RD
T
9 10 19
29 27 40 40 37 22 820
15 15 8 1
BARRY PL
SPR IN
AVE SHERMAN
20. 21. 22.
EW
18
HA MP SH I
A W IO
E AV
Columbia Road Argonne Place
16
RE AV E
11.
Arkansas Avenue
8
TON PL PRINCE
KENYON
Corridor Total
263
ST
9TH ST
Legend
Study Roadway
Study Roadway
Severity of Crashes
Regional Locationof Corridor
CorridorSubsetOverview UStreettoArkansasAve
SeverityCrashAnalysis
16thStreetCorridorProject Washington,D.C
November 2012
StreetCenterlines
PrincipalArterial MinorArterial Collector Local
Property Damage Only Injured Persons
Data collected between January 2006 and December 2010.

H:\projfile\11066 - 16th Street NW Corridor Study\gis\Map Figures\Figure4_LitReview_StudyAreas_11x17_2200scale.mxd
1inch=667feet
650
1,300
2,600 Feet
HARVARD ST
EUCLID ST
Y NE PI
17TH ST
NE W
HA M
1
PS HI RE AV E
3
AVE
10
11
12
NT P MOU
13
S LEA
A NT
ST
FULLER ST
CH AN BR
14
15
16
17
18
19
20 21
16TH ST
22
R FLO IDA
Y PK
AR KA NS
15TH ST
AS AV E
EUCLID ST
Head On 1 - U Street 2 - V Street 3 - Florida Avenue 3 - W Street 4 Belmont Street 5 Crescent Place 6 Kalorama Road 7 Euclid Street
VE R
Turning Movement
FLOR
Crash Type 14T byHLocation ST

Side Swipe Crash 16 5 8 4 1 8 3 12 6 11 11
BARRY PL
Crash Type by Location

Right Angle 7 11 2 3
EUCLID ST
Rear End 8 17 15 5 2 10 6 10 14 14 5 2
Pedestrian Crash 5 2 0 0 1 0 0 3 5 2 6 1
Other 11 8 7 3
HARVARD ST
Total 70 47 35
Head On 12 Irving Street 13 Lamont Street 14 Pine Street

IRVING ST
Turning Movement 10 7 1 7 10
RD
Side Swipe 17 5 1 17 6 3 5 7 7 12 4 169
Rear End 18 13 0 10 12 13 10 14 7 11 12 228
Right Angle 27 5 0 6 7 2 3 4 6 1 2 115

KA N
Pedestrian Crash 3 2
13TH ST
Other 8 2 0 1 1 3 3 1 4 3 1
AVE
Total 84 34 2 47 38
UPSHUR ST
COLUMBIA RD
2 1 1 0 2 2 0
11TH ST
21
VE IDA A
1 0 0 0 1 0 0 2 3
HA MP SH 0 IRE AV E
3 2 5 8 3 2
0 6 1 2
20 22 27 14 54 42 45
15 Park Road 16 Monroe Street 17 Newton Street 18 Meridian Place 19 Oak Street
T S OE NR MO
D KR PAR
5 0 0 5 3 7
3 4 3 9 2 8 2 2
6 5 6 10 4 2 144
29 27 40 40 37 22
A W IO E AV
SPR ING
SA S
AV 1 E
1 2 1 0 0
14 10 2 5 1
6 3 6 1
GIA GEOR
8 Fuller Street
MO N TA VE
SHERMAN
AVE
NE 20 Spring Place W
9 Harvard Street 10 Columbia Road

U ST
21 Spring Road
KENYON
PARK RD
8 1
37 7
22 Arkansas Avenue Corridor Total
11 Argonne Place
19
56
89
820
ST
Legend
Study Roadway
Study Roadway
Crash Type
Regional Locationof Corridor
CorridorSubsetOverview UStreettoArkansasAve
CrashTypeAnalysis
16thStreetCorridorProject Washington,D.C
November 2012
StreetCenterlines
PrincipalArterial MinorArterial Collector Local
Head On Crash Turning Movement Crash Side Swipe Crash Rear End Crash Right Angle Crash Pedestrian CrashData collected between Other
January 2006 and December 2010.

1inch=667feet
H:\projfile\11066 - 16th Street NW Corridor Study\gis\Map Figures\Figure4_LitReview_StudyAreas_11x17_2200scale.mxd
650
1,300
2,600 Feet
Final Report
Key findings from the safety analysis are as follows: The intersections of Irving Street, Columbia Road/Harvard Street NW, Spring Place and Spring Road and U Street exhibited the highest frequency of crashes, ranging from 70 to 84 reported crashes over five years. The crash analysis showed that there are about 50% more crashes in the reversible lane section compared to the non-reversible lane section. U Street experienced the highest number of crashes involving injured persons (21 total crashes) and Oak Street had the highest percentage of crashes involving injured persons (47.5%). Rear end crashes were the highest observed crash type along the corridor (228 total crashes). Side swipe crashes accounted for 21% of the total crashes along the corridor (169) and turning movements accounted for 17.5% of the crashes (143). Rear end crashes were reported the highest at V Street, Florida Avenue and Irving Street while side swipes were the highest type of crash at U Street, Irving Street and Park Road. 87 percent of pedestrian and bicycle crashes occurred within 100 feet of an intersection.
Summary of Findings
The evaluation of the existing conditions identified corridor and intersection level challenges and opportunities. These findings created a base knowledge for the alternatives development. The Alternatives development further explored how different alternatives may address challenges along the corridor and enhance opportunities. A summary of the challenges and opportunities are below and are broken down by location and mode. The northern section of the corridor is considered anywhere North of Arkansas Avenue, the central section is considered between Arkansas Avenue and U Street and the southern section is considered south of U Street. The challenges and opportunities identified below informed the alternatives development and technical analysis for each of the breakout projects.
April 2013
39
Final Report
Table 9. Location Northern
Central
Southern
Northern
Central
Summary of Challenges and Opportunities along the 16th Street NW Corridor Challenges Opportunities Private Auto Traffic queuing Capacity on many key challenges at many side streets to reallocate signalized intersections. pavement space. Crash frequency is higher There is operational in the section of the capacity to remove the corridor where the reversible lane. reversible lane is present. Dense parking 50 feet of curb-to-curb width and wide travel Reduced to 4 lanes south lanes of U Street NW Transit Lack of transit facilities Dense residential has limits transits potential commuter effectiveness capture Transit shares the Land use and character curbside lane with mixed supports multi-modal traffic enhancements. Lane reduction increases congestion Land use and character supports multi-modal enhancements.
Southern
Northern
Pedestrian and Bicycle Inconsistent sidewalks
Central
Skewed, closely spaced intersections Long east-west crossing distances
Southern
Crossing opportunities are spaced farther apart
Opportunities to reclaim pavements at some intersections Many intersections have crosswalks and plenty of standing room for pedestrians. Opportunities to reclaim pavements at some intersections Many intersections have crosswalks and plenty of standing room for pedestrians Dense, mixed land uses that promote walking
April 2013
40
Final Report
Based on the challenges and opportunities identified, the project team coordinated with DDOT staff to prioritize projects funds for the breakout projects. The project team and DDOT determined that it was best to focus funds on priority breakout projects and projects #6 (16th Street NW/Colorado Avenue/Blagden Avenue) and #7 (North End Parking) were removed from the analysis. The final break out projects the project focused on are listed below: Breakout Project #1: Reversible Lane Segment Breakout Project #2: 16th Street NW/Columbia Road NW/Harvard Road NW Breakout Project #3: 16th Street NW/15th Street NW/Irving Street Breakout Project #4: 16th Street NW/Park Road Breakout Project #5: 16th Street NW/Arkansas Avenue
April 2013
41
Section 5
Corridor Level Alternatives
Final Report
Introduction
Corridor level alternatives were developed to examine the full range of possibilities for space allocation within the curb-to-curb section of 16th Street NW. Following a reviewing of past studies and existing conditions, and through work sessions with the DDOT project team, it was determined that the scope for the corridor level analysis would focus on the 1.5 mile section of 16th Street NW between Arkansas Avenue to the north and U Street to the south. This section has 17 traffic signals and includes a reversible lane. It experiences congestion, the highest crash rates of any section of the corridor, high transit use, and significant pedestrian demands. The objective of this alternatives evaluation analysis summarized in this section is to identify the alternatives that maximize person through-put while achieving the goals of DDOTs Action Plan in the areas of mobility, safety, community and feasibility. Through a series of workshops and analysis, the following alternatives were selected for evaluation: Full time through lanes Two-way left-turn lanes Raised median Part-time transit lane Full-time transit lane
The remainder of this section describes each alternative and summarizes the results from a qualitative and quantitative evaluation against four criteria described in DDOTs Action Plan: Mobility, Safety, Community and Feasibility. Each alternative was evaluated using a Consumer Reports-style ranking system. The results were weighted by criteria and aggregated to a single score. From this evaluation the project team and DDOT ranked the alternatives and conducted a refined analysis to select a preferred alternative. Figure 16 provides an illustration and summary of each typical section alternative.
April 2013
43
Final Report
Figure 16 Summary Overview of Typical Sections Alternatives
April 2013
44
Final Report
Alternatives Assessment
FULL-TIME THROUGH LANES Implementing full time through lanes would remove the reversible lane and replace it with a northbound through lane, creating three lanes in the northbound direction and two lanes in the southbound direction from Arkansas Avenue south to U Street NW. This alternative benefits auto and transit mobility for vehicles exiting the District to travel north to Maryland and the I-495 Beltway. Removal of the reversible lane reduces capacity for southbound traffic which is most impactful during the morning commute period.
Mobility
The removal of the reversible lane would, in theory, reduce through capacity and may increase travel time for most vehicles in the peak hour. However, as shown in Table 10, many of the operations at intersections along the corridor do not vary greatly from existing conditions. More importantly, the full time transit lane option does not appear to make intersections that are already failing today, worse. Table 10. Summary of Traffic Operations at Key Intersections Existing Location on 16 Street NW U Street Harvard Road Columbia Road Irving Street Park Road Spring Road Arkansas Avenue
th
v/c Ratio AM PM 0.88 0.69 0.59 0.83 0.70 1.04 0.66 0.62 0.82 0.70 0.63 0.49 0.77 0.64
LOS AM E A B B C B C PM C D F B B A B
Full Time Through Lanes v/c Ratio LOS AM PM AM PM 0.88 0.69 E C 0.71 0.83 B D 0.64 1.04 C F 0.68 0.62 B B 1.02 0.70 F B 0.78 0.49 B A 0.77 0.64 B B
Person-throughput calculations indicate that the existing demand is met in the AM peak hour and 97 percent of the existing demand is met in the PM peak hour. This alternative will increase utilization of the curb lane, reducing through capacity for buses that typically use the curbside lane. As for pedestrians and bicyclists, this alternative will have minimal impact on their mobility as key LOS factors (Sidewalks, crossing distance, refuges etc.) do not change.
April 2013
45
Final Report
Safety
This alternative reduces the number of conflict points along the corridor for automobiles, particularly along the northern section where the reversible lane is present. The full-time through lane alternative creates no significant impact on the level of pedestrian exposure. While the alternative may simplify the corridor for transit, it will likely increase congestion in the curbside lane where transit typically travels.
Community
The full time through lane alternative creates on-street parking opportunities in the peak hour and eliminates the floating left-turn lane, improving driver comfort at intersections. Removing the reversible lane also simplifies the corridor from a human factors perspective. The addition of a lane in the northbound direction in the AM peak hours can provide on-street parking opportunities.
Feasibility
This alternative requires minimal striping and signage and does not impact right-of-way or curb and drainage. The alternative requires less signage and striping than exists today and the removal of the reversible lane reduces enforcement and management needs for the corridor. Summary Assessment: Full Time Through Lane Strengths Reduces conflicts due to reversible lane Requires minimal implementation and maintenance efforts Weaknesses Lacks service to peak period, peak direction traffic demand.
Opportunities Improves driver comfort and safety
Threats Potential for displaced traffic to adjacent streets
TWO-WAY LEFT-TURN LANE In this alternative a two-way left-turn lane replaces the reversible lane from Arkansas Avenue to a point south of Harvard Avenue. Replacing the reversible lane with a two-way, left-turn lane allows for separate left-turn movements at intersections where left turns are permitted. This increases opportunities for left-turn access along the corridor, particularly at mid-block locations. However, given the relatively low volume of left-turning movements along the corridor compared to through
April 2013
46
Final Report
movements, the left-turn lane will largely be unoccupied during most times of the day relative to its use as a shared lane.
Mobility
The two-way left-turn lane decreases capacity and increases travel time in the corridor for autos. Table 11. Summary of Traffic Operations at Key Intersections Existing Location on 16 Street NW U Street Harvard Road Columbia Road Irving Street Park Road Spring Road Arkansas Avenue
th
v/c Ratio AM PM 0.88 0.69 0.59 0.83 0.70 1.04 0.66 0.62 0.82 0.70 0.63 0.49 0.77 0.64
Two-way Left-Turn Lane v/c Ratio LOS AM PM AM PM 0.88 0.69 E C 0.71 0.83 B D 0.64 1.04 C F 0.68 0.62 B B 1.02 0.70 F B 0.78 0.49 B A 0.77 0.64 B B
Person-throughput calculations indicate 86 percent of the existing demand is met in the AM peak hour and 97 percent of the existing demand is met in the PM peak hour. The removal of the center reversible lane creates congestion for buses in the curb lane at certain points of the corridor and worsens mobility for transit vehicles.
Safety
This alternative increases pedestrian-auto conflicts due to the exposure to left-turn movements at driveways. This alternative neither creates nor avoids additional conflict points for transit vehicles along the corridor. There are safety concerns associated with two-way left-turn lanes, particularly regarding overlapping left-turn movements; however no new conflicts are created compared to the existing reversible lane which presents greater hazard for head-on conflicts.
Community
This alternative dedicates a lane for left-turn movements which improves local auto accessibility but does not benefit non-auto modes. This alternative may serve an aesthetic improvement for local residents compared to the reversible lane, but at a limited scale. This alternative provides no peak-hour parking and will likely eliminate some off-peak parking.
April 2013
47
Final Report
Feasibility
This alternative requires new signing and striping and efforts to coordinate the removal of on-street parking with local neighborhoods. This alternative requires minimal on-going management and maintenance. Summary Assessment: Two-way Left-turn Lane Strengths Provides defined turning opportunities Increases access to driveways Weaknesses Reduces capacity and increases congestion and travel time for autos and transit Eliminates peak period parking and most off peak period parking
Opportunities Improves east-west connectivity
Threats Potential for displaced traffic on adjacent roadways Increase risk of certain types of crashes Could lead to less transit service due to poor performance
RAISED MEDIAN The raised median alternative involves a continuous raised or striped median along 16th Street between Arkansas Avenue and U Street. This results in a typical section that consists of two through lanes in each direction at all times of day. This would provide some protection for pedestrians in the form of a refuge island and increase green space along the corridor. It would also limit opportunities for mid-block turning movements. Left-turn bays could be accommodated at select locations such as Park Road, Irving Street, and Argonne Place).
Mobility
This alternative offers mobility improvements for pedestrians by creating protected refuges at crossing locations on 16th Street NW; however, this alternative impacts the limited through capacity for automobiles and transit. During the morning peak hour the southbound lanes would be congested due to the removal of the reversible lane.
April 2013
48
Final Report
Table 12.
Summary of Traffic Operations at Key Intersections Existing v/c Ratio LOS AM PM AM PM 0.88 0.69 E C 0.59 0.83 A D 0.70 1.04 B F 0.66 0.62 B B 0.82 0.70 C B 0.63 0.49 B A 0.77 0.64 C B Raised Median v/c Ratio LOS AM PM AM PM 0.88 0.69 E C 0.87 0.83 C D 0.83 1.04 F F 0.80 0.62 B B 1.03 0.82 F B 0.78 0.66 B A 0.77 0.64 B A
Similar to the two-way left-turn lane alternative, person-throughput calculations indicate 86 percent of the existing demand is met in the AM peak hour and 97 percent of the existing demand is met in the PM peak hour. This leaves an unmet demand of 685 people in the AM peak hour and 143 people in the PM peak hour.
Safety
This alternative improves comfort and safety levels for pedestrians who cross 16th Street NW. The raised median neither creates nor avoids additional conflict points for transit vehicles along the corridor. The raised median would make the corridor less more understandable for motorists and improve driver comfort, particularly during non-congested conditions.
Community
The improved mobility for pedestrians is discounted by the decrease in mobility for transit and automobiles during peak periods. The raised median will create opportunities for left turn pockets at certain locations. The raised median can act as a "boulevard treatment" enhancing character and aesthetics along the corridor. This alternative provides no peak hour parking and will probably eliminate most off-peak parking.
Feasibility
This alternative requires the most construction effort. The raised median self regulates itself once in place but requires landscaping maintenance.
April 2013
49
Final Report
Summary Assessment: Raised Median Strengths Reduces conflicts and potential for crashes Provides a refuge for pedestrian crossings Weaknesses Reduces capacity and increases congestion and travel time for autos and transit Eliminates peak period parking and most off peak period parking
Opportunities Redefine southern segment improve livability access Improve east-west connectivity and
Threats Potential for displaced traffic on adjacent roadways Could lead to less transit service due to poor performance
PART-TIME TRANSIT LANES The part-time transit lane alternative replaces the curb lanes of the existing lane configuration with transit-only lanes that accommodate only buses and right turning vehicles at peak hours of the day. While there is no widely accepted warrant analysis for transit-only lanes, practitioners have generally required a minimum of 25-30 buses per hour for typical urban conditions. This ensures that the lane appears to be sufficiently used (as opposed to a reserved, but empty, lane). In addition to the bus frequency requirement, there should be at least two general traffic lanes per direction independent of the bus lane. Currently, 16th Street NW experiences between 37-27 buses per hour during commute periods in the peak direction.
Mobility
This alternative reduces through capacity for autos in the peak hour by removing a travel lane for transit. However, the peak hour transit lane improves travel time and service capabilities for buses and transit throughput increases by increasing the amount of service along the corridor. Traffic operations indicate that all intersections operate at an acceptable LOS with the exception of 16th Street NW/Columbia Road in the p.m. peak hour. Note, this intersection is failing today as well.
April 2013
50
Final Report
Table 13.
Summary of Traffic Operations at Key Intersections Existing Part Time Transit Lanes v/c Ratio LOS AM PM AM PM 0.88 0.69 E C 0.76 0.78 B D 0.89 1.02 C F 0.87 0.62 C B 0.97 0.81 E B 0.81 0.64 B A 0.77 0.62 B A
Location on 16 Street NW U Street Harvard Road Columbia Road Irving Street Park Road Spring Road Arkansas Avenue
th
v/c Ratio AM PM 0.88 0.69 0.59 0.83 0.70 1.04 0.66 0.62 0.82 0.70 0.63 0.49 0.77 0.64
Person-throughput calculations indicate a 93 percent of the existing demand is met in the AM peak hour and the existing demand is met in the PM peak hour. This leaves an unmet demand of 325 people in the AM peak hour. This alternative results in no change from existing conditions during non-peak periods of the day.
Safety
This alternative has limited impact on the level of pedestrian exposure for crossings on 16th Street NW. This alternative formally separates transit vehicles from mixed traffic and reduces auto-transit conflict points. This alternative could increase auto-auto conflicts due to the increased pressure to use the reversible lane where left-turn movements occur.
Community
This alternative improves mobility for transit users and accessibility along the corridor. There is no significant impact to cross-street turning movements as the transit lane allows right-turn movements. This alternative could have a positive impact to the character along the corridor in terms of providing a transit amenity, albeit limited to only the peak hours and direction during weekdays.
Feasibility
This alternative requires new signage and striping, as well as coordination with WMATA. The transit lane will need a combination of increased frequency of service and enforcement in order to regulate its use.
April 2013
51
Final Report
Summary Assessment: Part-time Transit Lanes Strengths Improves mobility for transit users Provides significant increase in capacity for transit vehicles along corridor Weaknesses Threats Potential for displaced traffic on adjacent roadways Lack of use could undermine perception of effectiveness of transit-only lanes and compliance Reduces capacity and increases congestion and travel time for autos Eliminates peak period parking Requires enforcement
Opportunities Potential to increase transit service and ridership
Refined Analysis
Following the initial assessment of the part-time transit lanes alternative and questions raised during the working meetings with DDOT staff, a refined analysis was conducted to further examine the operations impacts of the part-time transit lane alternative, and to explore the feasibility of extending the part-time transit lane south to H Street to provide a connection to a network of transit-only lanes. This refined analysis involved evaluating the impacts of traffic operations at the intersection level based on different lane configurations options for transit. The analysis also evaluated the impacts on automobiles, transit, safety and parking. Finally, the analysis evaluated the feasibility of the lane configuration. Table 14 provides the relative impacts of the typical section options along 16th Street NW for the peak hour transit lane south of U Street NW.
April 2013
52
Final Report
Table 14.
Relative Impacts of Typical Section Options for 16th Street NW Peak Hour Transit Lane South of U Street NW.
Mobility Impacts Option Description 4 Lanes with Parking 1 Safety Impacts Mobility Impacts (Autos) (Transit) Improved peak period bus operations and reliability Improved peak period bus operations and reliability Improved peak period bus operations and reliability Improved peak period bus operations and reliability Improved peak period bus operations and reliability
Community Impacts (Parking) None Feasibility Requires restriping and signage
Peak direction left-turns likely to AM: Over-capacity in SB; use transit lane as by-pass (AM high delay and queues; & PM) route diversion PM: None Introduces a reversible lane; negative impact for autos and peds Reduces left-turn conflicts with following through vehicles given addition of left-turn lanes (AM & PM) Introduces a reversible lane; negative impact for autos and peds AM: None PM: None
Extend Reversible Lanes and Remove Parking 2
Loss of peak-hour parking in off-peak direction None
Complicated transition south of U Street
5 Lanes with Left-turn Pockets and Parking 3
AM: Over-capacity in SB; high delay and queues; route diversion PM: None AM: None PM: None
Requires restriping and signage
5 Lanes with Reversible Lane and Parking
None
Complicated transition south of U Street Requires restriping and signage
5 Lanes with 3 Permanent SB Lanes and Parking
Peak direction left-turns likely to AM: None use transit lane as by-pass (PM PM: None only)
None
Improvement compared to existing conditions No/negligible conditions Slightly negative impact compared to existing conditions Negative impact compared to existing conditions change compared to existing
April 2013
53
Final Report
Table 14 indicates the mobility impacts on transit are an improvement from existing conditions south of U Street in any of the proposed curb-to-curb options. Option 5, which entails 5 lanes, 3 permanent southbound lanes and parking, does not have a substantially negative impact on any of the criteria. While option 2, extending the reversible lane and removing parking, has the most criteria where there are negative impacts. FULL-TIME TRANSIT LANES The full-time transit lane alternative is similar to the part-time transit lane alternative in that it replaces the curb lanes of the existing lane configuration with transit-only lanes that are to be used only by buses and right turning vehicles. However, in this alternative, the curb side lane is dedicated to buses and right turning vehicles at all times of the day.
Mobility
This alternative reduces through capacity for autos at all times of the day by removing a travel lane for transit. Traffic operations indicate that all intersections operate at an acceptable LOS with the exception of 16th Street NW/Columbia Road in the p.m. peak hour. Note, this intersection is failing today as well. Table 15. Summary of Traffic Operations at Key Intersections Existing v/c Ratio LOS AM PM AM PM 0.88 0.69 E C 0.59 0.83 A D 0.70 1.04 B F 0.66 0.62 B B 0.82 0.70 C B 0.63 0.49 B A 0.77 0.64 C B Full Time Transit Lanes v/c Ratio LOS AM PM AM PM 0.88 0.69 E C 0.71 0.83 B D 0.64 1.04 C F 0.68 0.62 B B 1.02 0.70 F B 0.78 0.49 B A 0.77 0.64 B B
However, transit throughput increases, which increases person throughput along the corridor. Similar to the part-time transit lane alternative, person-throughput calculations indicate 93 percent of the existing demand is met in the AM peak hour and the existing demand is met in the PM peak hour. This leaves an unmet demand in the AM peak hour. The transit lane will also reduce through capacity for autos unnecessarily in the off-peak hours.
April 2013
54
Final Report
The full-time transit lane improves bus travel time and the amount of bus service that can be provided along the corridor.
Safety
This alternative has limited impact on the level of pedestrian exposure for crossings on 16th Street NW. This alternative formally separates transit vehicles from mixed traffic and reduces auto-transit conflict points. This alternative could increase auto-auto conflicts due to the increased pressure to use the reversible lane where left-turn movements occur.
Community
This alternative improves mobility for transit users and accessibility along the corridor. There is no significant impact to cross-street turning movements as the transit lane allows right-turn movements. This alternative could have a positive impact to the character along the corridor in terms of providing a transit amenity, albeit limited to only the peak hours and direction during weekdays.
Feasibility
This alternative requires new signage and striping, as well as coordination with WMATA. The transit lane will need a combination of increased frequency of service and enforcement in order to regulate its use. Summary Assessment: Full-time Transit Lanes Strengths Improves mobility for transit users Provides significant increase in capacity for transit vehicles along corridor Weaknesses Reduces capacity and increases congestion and travel time for autos Eliminates on-street parking Requires enforcement
Threats
Opportunities Potential to increase transit service and ridership
Potential for displaced traffic on adjacent roadways Lack of use could undermine perception of effectiveness of transit-only lanes and compliance
April 2013
55
Final Report
Evaluation Matrix
Table 16 provides an evaluation matrix for each of the typical section alternatives described in this section. The alternatives were evaluated using a Consumer Reports style system of 0-5 where 0 represents poor and 5 represents good. The rankings are qualitative in nature and reflect input from a wide variety of individuals including DDOT stakeholders and project team members. As such, these results are intended to help distinguish among the strengths and weaknesses of each alternative and to identify a select set for refined analysis. Based on results of the alternative ranking and through subsequent discussions with DDOT staff and the project team, three alternatives were selected for further evaluation: Full-Time Through Lanes Peak-Hour Peak-Direction Transit Lanes Raised/Landscaped Median
The project team conducted additional analysis and prepared summary boards as part of a presentation to summarize the results. These graphics are shown in Figure 17 to Figure 19.
April 2013
56
Final Report
Table 16.
Evaluation Matrix
Rating of Alternatives
Safety Pedestrians Transit Automobiles Mobility Pedestrians Transit Automobiles Community Mode Choice Cross Street Access Character Impacts on Parking Feasibility Construction Cost/Time to Implement Management/Enforcement
2 3 2 2 3 4 2 2 2 3 5 3
2.74 3
2 2 3 2 2 2 3 3 3 4 4 4
2.68 4
2 4 2 3 4 3 4 2 3 3 3 1
2.83 2
2 3 2 2 3 5 2 1 1 2 4 2
2.51 5
2 4 2 3 4 0 4 2 3 1 3 1
2.43 6
4 2 5 4 0 0 3 4 5 2 1 5
2.85 1
Rating Ranking
April 2013
G - Two-Way LeftTurn Lane
F - Raised Median
B - Remove Reversible Lane
D - Extend Reversible Lane
A - Existing Configuration
C - Peak Hour Transit Lanes
E - Full Time Transit Lane
1 2 2 2 0 0 1 4 3 2 3 5
1.87 7
57
Final Report
Figure 17 Overview of Full-Time Through lanes Alternative
April 2013
58
Final Report
Figure 18 Overview of Peak Hour Transit Lanes Alternative
April 2013
59
Final Report
Figure 19 Overview of Raised Median Alternative
April 2013
60
Final Report
Preferred Alternative: Part Time Transit Lanes

Following the results of the technical evaluation and workshops with the DDOT project team, it was concluded that that the part-time transit lane alternative provides the greatest potential for improving person mobility along the corridor while meeting DDOT and partner agency goals in terms of mobility, safety, community, and feasibility. This part-time transit lane alternative would extend for 2.7 miles between H Street NW and Arkansas Avenue NW and would dedicate a curbside lane to transit in the peak-hour, peak direction. Based on the project teams analysis, the Part Time Transit lanes are estimated to have the following benefits: Increase transit travel speeds by 30-percent; and Accommodate up to a 10-percent increase in person demand.
Drawbacks to the implementation of this option include: Increase in vehicular delays at critical intersections along the corridor, including U Street, the Columbia/Harvard/Argonne intersections and R Street; and Inability to reduce crossing distances and vehicle exposure for pedestrians crossing 16th Street. The project team recommends advancing the Part Time Transit lane alternative by conducting detailed operations analysis to address specific questions related to the signing, striping, and signal timing changes that would need to be implemented to accommodate the transit-only lanes. The implementation plan in Section 7 further describes the NEPA and DCEPA environmental processes necessary for project implementation.
April 2013
61
Section 6
Intersection Level Alternatives
Final Report
Introduction
This section identifies intersection-level improvements for select locations along the 16th Street NW corridor. Through a review of previous studies (Section 2) and existing conditions (Section 3) the project team identified locations that experience operational and/or safety deficiencies by one or more roadway users. Four breakout projects were selected for further analysis: Breakout Project #2: 16th Street NW/Columbia Road NW/Harvard Road NW Breakout Project #3: 16th Street NW/15th Street NW/Irving Street Breakout Project #4: 16th Street NW/Park Road Breakout Project #5: 16th Street NW/Arkansas Avenue
This section describes improvement concepts for each of these locations and provides a qualitatively evaluation using four criteria described in DDOTs Action Plan: Mobility, Safety, Community, and Feasibility. The intent of this section is to identify locations that can benefit from intersection-level improvements and to identify promising concepts following the planning-level evaluation that was conducted. The analysis summarized in this section was performed independent of the typical section alternatives which are described in Section 6.
Breakout Project #2 and #3: 16th Street NW/Columbia Road NW/Harvard Road NW/Irving Street NW
Breakout projects #2 and #3 were combined in the analysis due to the close proximity of the projects and similar challenges they faced. This series of intersections includes several roads that intersect 16th Street NW at various angles with have various flow directions (one-way and two-way), all within 1,000 feet. The limits of this study area extend from 15th Street NW to the north and Harvard Street NW to the south. The closely spaced intersections and complicated geometry creates circulation problems as well as difficulties for drivers attempting to turn left. This also impacts operations for through movements on 16th Street NW. 16th Street NW has a six-lane section through the area and the southern end of the reversible lane is located just north of 16th Street NW/15th Street NW. This segment includes five intersections and a slip lane for buses on southbound 16th Street NW just north of Columbia Road NW.
April 2013
63
Final Report
MOBILITY This section of the 16th Street NW corridor is heavily used by private automobiles, transit, and pedestrians. Traffic volumes along 16th Street NW vary based on the time of day and range between 1,100 and 1,800 vehicles per hour. There is also a high demand for travel in the east-west directions which creates additional conflicts and circulation challenges in the area of the cluster. There are several bus routes that travel on 16th Street NW and Mount Pleasant through the study area. This concentrated demand for transit complicates traffic flow as the buses are in mixed traffic and circulate around Argonne Place and Columbia Road NW. The bus stop on the west side of 16th Street NW between Irving Street NW and Harvard Street NW also generates high volumes of pedestrian activity. The lack of a mid-block crossing and the far spacing of crosswalks (730 feet apart) limit pedestrians ability to traverse the corridor east-west, particularly when trying to access the bus stop. The geometry of the intersections and crosswalks are also laid out to favor the north-south movement of private automobiles over pedestrians. Pedestrian activity and demand is of considerable importance in this area. Land uses around the Columbia-Harvard-Irving intersections generally consist of retail and commercial development. Lincoln Middle School on the northeast corner of the 16th Street NW/Irving Street NW intersection generates high pedestrian volumes. Counts show between 200 and 700 pedestrians in the AM and PM peak hours in the vicinity of the school. SAFETY Over a five year period, 166 crashes were recorded within the 16th Street NW/Columbia Road NW/Harvard Road NW/Irving Street NW intersections. Of these 166 crashes, 18 crashes reported involved an injured person and 11 reported crashes involved a pedestrian. The next highest frequency of crashes was rear-end crashes (57 crashes) and side swipe crashes (39 crashes). COMMUNITY The 16th Street NW/Columbia Road NW/Harvard Road NW/Irving Street NW intersections provide an important point for east-west and north-south movements in the area, including pedestrians accessing the Columbia Heights metro station and retail along 14th Street NW. There is also a substantial amount of transit activity, with multiple bus stops in the area and a bus slip-lane In the southbound direction,
64 April 2013
Final Report
south of Argonne Place. The presence of Lincoln Middle School at 16th Street NW/15th Street NW/Irving Street NW also creates substantial pedestrian activity when school is in session. The confusion of the intersection creates a comfort barrier for pedestrians and drivers. The long crossing distances across 16th Street NW exposes pedestrians to the high volumes of traffic travelling in the northbound-southbound direction. The skewed intersection legs coupled with being closely spaced, also creates driver discomfort especially during the peak hour when there is congestion and substantial queuing through the area. IMPROVEMENT OPTIONS Several opportunities for improvements were identified through the analysis. This includes
opportunities for reclaimed pavement and changes in the cross section. 0depicts a map that summarizes the issues and opportunities within the project area. The project also developed geometric concept designs to the intersections that address mobility, circulation and safety. Figure 20 provides a depiction of the existing geometry and the traffic circulation in the area. Existing pedestrian crossings are also shown.
Figure 20 Existing Geometry and Circulation at CHI

As indicated in Figure 20, many intersections show multiple conflict points. These conflict points are further complicated by the skewed angle of the intersections. There are also minimal crossing opportunities across 16th Street NW between Columbia Road NW and Irving Street.
65 April 2013
Final Report
Figure 21 shows Option 1 for geometric changes that could potentially improve mobility and safety of the cluster of intersections.
Figure 21 Option 1: Geometry and Circulation at CHI

Figure 21 shows the simplifying the intersection of Columbia Road/NW/Harvard Road NW (west of 16 th Street NW) by removing the south leg of Harvard Road NW and adding a median to create a right-in, right-out on the north leg of Harvard Road NW. Option 1 also maximizes reclaimed pavement for pedestrians with the bus slip lane on 16th street NW. Figure 22 shows Option 2 for geometric changes that could potentially improve mobility and safety of the cluster of intersections.
66 April 2013
Final Report
As shown in Figure 22, Option 2 builds off of Option 1 by changing Argonne Place from a two-way to a one-way westbound street. This provides the opportunity to reclaim pavement on the south side of Argonne Place and simplifies conflict points for turning movements at 16th Street NW/Argonne Place. Figure 23 shows Option 3 for geometric changes that could potentially improve mobility and safety of the cluster of intersections.

As indicated by Figure 23, option 3 builds off Option 1 and removes the 16th Street NW/Argonne Place intersection. Vehicles traveling east on Argonne Place are forces to turn left onto Mount Vernon Place and vehicles traveling south on Mount Pleasant are forced to turn right onto Argonne Place. Figure 24 shows Option 4 for geometric changes that could potentially improve mobility and safety of the cluster of intersections.
67 April 2013
Final Report

As indicated in Figure 24, Option 4 is a modified version of Option 3. The 16th Street NW/Argonne Place intersection is not completely removed, but instead has its turning movements limited to the westbound direction. Figure 25 shows Option 5 for geometric changes that could potentially improve mobility and safety of the cluster of intersections.
68 April 2013
16 StreetNWCorridorProject
th
FinalReport
As indicated in Figure 25, Option 5 builds off the geometric changes in Option 1 at Columbia Road/MW/Harvard Road/NW/Argonne Place. In option 5, Mount Pleasant is closed to vehicles between ArgonnePlaceandHobartStreetNW.
69 April2013
th
FinalReport
FEASIBILITY The 16th Street NW/Columbia Road NW/Harvard Road NW/Irving Street NW intersections have numerous opportunities within the curbtocurb width. While all of the alternatives from the corridor level project (breakout project #1) are feasible through the 16th Street NW/Columbia Road NW/Harvard RoadNW/IrvingStreetNWintersections,therearedifferentimpactsspecifictotheprojectareaforeach of the corridor level alternative. Table 17 provides a summary of the impacts of each alternative from breakout project #1 on Columbia Road/Harvard Road/Irving Street. It is recommended that further analysisisconductedontheintersectionstoevaluateanychangesspecifictotheintersections. Table17. Corridor Options and the potential changes to the Columbia Road/Harvard Street/IrvingStreetStudyArea BreakoutProject#1:CorridorLevelOption ImpactonColumbiaRoad/Harvard Road/IrvingStreet Existingconditions Fulltimethroughlanes None Opportunity to reduces lanes to 10 and reclaim pavement for alternative modes Reduce lane widths to 10 to have two lanessouthboundandtwolanesNB Improve circulation around Argonne Place Reduce lane widths to 10 to have two lanessouthboundandtwolanesNB Construct leftturn pocket at Argonne Place Restripe to have three southbound lanes and two northbound lanes. In the a.m. the southbound curb lane is dedicated to transit and in the p.m. the northbound curb lane is dedicated totransit Removepeakhourparking Restripe to have three southbound lanes and two northbound lanes. In the a.m. the southbound curb lane is dedicated to transit and in the p.m. the northbound curb lane is dedicated totransit Removeparking
Twoway,leftturnlane
RaisedMedian
Parttimetransitlane
Fulltimetransitlane
71 April2013
th
FinalReport
BreakoutProject#4:16thStreetNW/ParkRoad/PineStreet The 16th Street NW/Park Road/Pine Street intersection is signalized and operates with a jug handle. Northbound leftturn movements are prohibited at the intersection except for buses. Instead, these vehiclesareaccommodatedbydivertingrightontoPineStreetinadvanceofParkRoadandthenturning leftontoParkRoadandcontinuingthroughthe16thStreetNW/ParkRoadintersection.Significantqueue spillback and unbalanced lane utilization have been observed on Park Road in the westbound direction due tothe presenceofthejughandle.Inaddition,thepresenceof onstreet parkingrestricts capacityat theintersectionapproach.Thisintersectionalsoexperienceshighpedestrianactivityduringservicesand events at the Shrine of the Sacred Heart Church located on the southeast corner of Park Road /Pine Street. Signal improvements, striping, and pedestrian crossings were implemented at this intersection during the course of this study. However, additional improvements have been identified to further improve operationsandsafetyatthislocation.
Figure27 WestboundapproachonParkRoad
Mobility ThepresenceofonstreetparkingonParkRoadrestrictsthecapacityofthewestboundapproachtoone lane.This contributes to vehicle queuing which exceeds the available storage by approximately 100 feet forthewestboundapproachand500feetforthenorthboundapproach.
72 April2013
th
FinalReport
Table18summarizestheexistingtrafficoperationsresultsfromaSynchroanalysisofexistingconditions fortheweekdaya.m.andp.m.peakhours.Asshowninthetable,theintersectionoperatesatLOSCand thevolumetocapacityratiooperatesbelowcapacity. Queuesonthewestboundapproachexceedthedistancebetweentheintersectionandthedownstream signal. As mentioned previously, this condition is caused by the presence of onstreet parking on Park Roadandthehighvolumeofcirculatingtrafficfromthejughandlemovements. Table18. ExistingOperationsfortheAMandPMPeakHoursatthe16thStreetNW/Park RoadIntersection th PM 16 Street NW/Park Road/Pine AM Street v/c Ratio LOS Northbound Queue (feet) Available 95th Percentile Westbound Queue (feet) Available 95th Percentile 0.82 C 400 160 160 360 0.88 C 400 635 160 190
SAFETY A crash history analysis was completed to assess auto and pedestrian safety. Crash data were reviewed and analyzed from DDOT crash records for a fiveyear period from January 1, 2006 to December 31, 2010atstudyintersectionsbetweenUStreetNWandArkansasAvenueNW.Overthefiveyearperioda total of 820 crashes were recorded along the corridor; 47 of which were recorded at the 16th Street NW/Park Road intersection. Of these 47 crashes, 10 crashes reported injured persons and 6 involved pedestrians.ParkRoadhadthehighestnumberofpedestriancrashesofanystudyintersection(alsotied withColumbiaRoad,SpringRoadandOakStreet). COMMUNITY The16thStreetNW/Park Road/PineStreetintersectionissurroundedby diverselanduses that generate pedestrian activity. The Shrine of the Sacred Heart School is to the east and Capital City PCS Upper School is to the west of the intersection. There are also a number of commercial and residential land
73 April2013
th
FinalReport
usesnearbytheintersection.The16thStreetNW/ParkRoad/PineStreetintersectioncreatestwo,closely spacedintersections,creatingmultiple,closelyspacedcrossingsforpedestrianstravellingeastwest. IMPROVEMENTOPTIONS Four potential lane configurations for the northbound and westbound approaches of the 16th Street NW/Park Road intersection were evaluated to address current operational deficiencies. Table 19 summarizesanddescribeseachofthelanegeometrycombination. Table19.
Existing configurations lane Remove parking for Remove parking for two full lanes on the WB approach; no change for NBapproach Remove parking
LaneConfigurationAlternativesfor16thStreetNW/ParkRoad ParkRoad(Westbound)
dedicated WB rightturn lane; no change for NB approach
for dedicated WB leftturn pocket;
no change for NB approach
No change for WB
Remove
parking
for
Remove parking for two full lanes on the WB approach; transit lane on NBapproach
Remove
parking
16thStreetNW(Northbound)
approach; lane on
transit NB
dedicated WB rightturn lane; transit lane on NB approach
approach
transit lane on NB approach
No change for WB approach; dedicated transit
Remove
parking
for
Remove parking for two full lanes on the WB approach; transit lane and leftturn lane on NB approach
Remove
parking
dedicated WB rightturn lane; transit lane and leftturn lane on NB approach
lane and leftturn lane on NB
transit lane and leftturn lane on NBapproach
approach No change for WB approach; dedicated leftturn lane on NB Remove parking for Remove parking for two full lanes on the WB approach; dedicated left turnlaneonNBapproach
Remove
parking
dedicated WB rightturn lane; dedicated leftturn laneonNBapproach
dedicated leftturn lane on NB
approach
approach
The lane configuration options shown in Table 19 can all be accommodated within the current curbto curbwidthon16thStreetNWandParkRoad.
74 April2013
th
FinalReport
A Synchro analysis was conducted for the existing weekday a.m. and p.m. peak hours for each of the alternatives. Appendix 1 contains the detailed results. In summary, queues are substantially reduced on thewestboundapproachifparkingisremovedfortwolanesontheapproach. Feasibility All of the potential improvements identified are feasible within the curbtocurb space on Park Road. The alternatives where an additional lane is added on the Park Road approach will require removing parking spaces. The removal of parking spaces and the additional lane will add capacity in the westbound direction but may impact pedestrian mobility. However, there have been recent changes to the crosswalk striping of the intersection as well as the addition of pedestrian signal heads that have providedaddedsafetybenefitstotheintersection.
BreakoutProject#5:16thStreetNW/ArkansasAvenue
The 16th Street NW/Arkansas Avenue intersection is a threelegged intersection with 16th Street NW running northsouth and Arkansas Avenue intersecting at a fortyfive degree angle from the northeast. Theintersectionislocatedatthenorthernterminusofthereversiblelanesectionalong16thStreetNW. During the weekday AM peak hour, the northbound approach of the intersection operates with one through lane and an exclusive rightturn lane. The reversible lane serves as an additional southbound throughlaneintheAMpeakhour. In the weekday PM peak hour, the reversible lane serves northbound traffic. The lane configuration for the northbound approach at the intersection with Arkansas Avenue consists of two through lanes and anexclusiverightturnlane. The westbound approach is a twolane approach with dedicated right and leftturn lanes. There are two pedestrian crosswalks, one across the southbound approach (with a pedestrian refuge in the median) and another long, skewed crosswalk along the westbound approach. The skew of the intersection enables northbound vehicles to turnright onto Arkansas Avenue at a high
75 April2013
th
FinalReport
speed with little deceleration. This highspeed turn, coupled with the long crossing on the westbound approachofArkansasAvenuecreatesanuncomfortableandpotentiallyunsafecrossingforpedestrians. Three potential alternatives were developed at a concept design level to improve pedestrian safety. Resultsfromanoperationalanalysisshowthatthewestboundapproachcanbereducedtoonelaneand the northbound exclusive rightturn lane can become a shared throughright as long as at least one additionalnorthboundthroughlanewasavailable. MOBILITY Table20showstheexistingtrafficoperationsfortheAMandPMpeakhours. Table20. ExistingTrafficOperationsat16thStreetNW/ArkansasAvenue 16thStreetNW/ArkansasAvenue AM PM v/c Ratio LOS Northbound Queue (feet) Available 95th Percentile Southwestbound Queue (feet) Available 95th Percentile As shown in Table 20, the intersection operates at LOS B and D during the weekday a.m. and p.m. peak hours, respectively. This indicates that the existing lane geometry is more than sufficient to accommodateautodemand. SAFETY A crash history analysis assessed auto and pedestrian safety. The observed speeding along the exclusive northbound right turn and the sight distance impeded by trees on the southwest corner presents pedestrian and automobile safety concerns. Crash data was reviewed and analyzed from DDOT crash records for a fiveyear period from January 1, 2006 to December 31, 2010 at study intersections between U Street NW and Arkansas Avenue NW. Over the five year period a total of 820 crashes were 0.72 B 500 123 575 135 0.67 D 500 321 575 42
76 April2013
th
FinalReport
recorded along the corridor; 22 of which were recorded at the 16th Street NW/Arkansas Avenue intersection.Ofthese22crashes,eightcrashesreportedinjuredpersonsandoneinvolvedapedestrian. COMMUNITY The16thStreetNW/ArkansasAvenueintersectionisonthedividebetweenthereversiblelanesectionto the south and the fourlane raised median section to the north. The area quickly becomes dominantly residentialandparkspaceonthesoutheastcorner.Thereisalsoacattlepathformingonthesoutheast cornerwherepeoplearewalkingwithoutsidewalksandtheirdesiretowalkhereisclearlyvisible. IMPROVEMENTOPTIONS Twopotentiallaneconfigurationsweredevelopedforthe16thStreetNWnorthboundapproachandone new lane configuration was developed for the Arkansas Avenue westbound approach. These lane configurationoptionsconsistof: Onesharedthroughandrightturnlaneonthenorthboundapproach(16thStreetNW) One through and one shared through and rightturn lane on the northbound approach (16th StreetNW) Onesharedleftandrightturnlaneonthewestboundapproach(ArkansasAvenue)
Results from an operations analysis of these alternatives indicate three through lanes need to be maintained on northbound 16th Street Avenue NW during the weekday p.m. peak hour, but the westbound approach on Arkansas Avenue can be reduced to a single lane and still maintain LOS D or betteroperations. FEASIBILITY The proposed improvement options can all be accommodated within the existing rightofway and requirenoadditionalmaintenanceorenforcement.Thephysicalchangesincludecurbextensionsonthe south east corner and along the north side of the Arkansas Avenue approach. This reclaims pavement for sidewalks and narrows the crossing distance across Arkansas Avenue. The curb extension also realigns the Arkansas Avenue approach so that speeds may be reduced for turning vehicles. Figure 28 showsaschematicofaconceptdesignplanfortheproposedchanges.
77 April2013
th
FinalReport
Figure28 ConceptDesignfor16thStreetNW/ArkansasAvenueIntersection
78 April2013
Section7

Recommendationsand NextSteps
th
FinalReport
KeyImmediateNextSteps
Thekeynextstepsareasfollows: Define NEPA process and next steps for planning. This should be done after DDOTs long range transportationplanconfirmshighlevelgoals. ObtainapprovalforDDOTspreferredalternative Completepreliminarydesignforpreferredalternativeincluding: Refine detailed traffic operations analysis to determine the preferred intersection treatments, laneconfigurations,andparkingmanagementatkeysectionsalongthecorridor. Conduct microsimulation modeling at select intersections such as Columbia/Harvard, Irving/15thStreet,andArkansasAvenue. Assess impact to onstreet parking along the corridor and evaluate options for removing/relocatingparking. Prepareadesignplantodeterminehowthecorridorandintersectionswilllookandfunction. Solicit feedback through a public open house to gain public and political input and the determinelevelofsupportfortheproposedrecommendations.Theopenhouseshoulddescribe the purpose and need of the project, the alternatives that were evaluated along with the evaluationresults,andtherecommendedimprovementsandimplementationplan. BuildpartnershipsforimplementationwithWMATA,MarylandSHA,andMTA. WMATA: Success of the project depends largely on the number of buses that use the peak hour transit lane. Under current service levels, approximately 25 buses per hour would travel in the transit lane during the peak hours; this is generally considered the minimum threshold for a dedicated transit lane. In order to realize the full potential of person throughput, an increase in transit service along the corridor above the current levels will be necessary by WMATA. Further, the addition of transitlane corridors along H Street, I Street, and K Street would build a critical mass of transit lanes in the District and improve networkwideperformancefortransitriders. Maryland SHA and MTA: Coordination with Maryland SHA and MTA provides the opportunity to create a regionally connected transit network. The northern portions of the WMATA Sline routes connect to the Silver Spring transit center and coordination with SHA
April 2013
80
th
FinalReport
and MTA will allow a seamless continuation of transit preferential treatments to a major hub. MWCOG:CoordinationwithMWCOGwillbenecessarythroughtheimplementationprocess to define analysis requirements for assessing impacts to air quality, and regional travel patterns. Develop 30percent design plans to be approved by PPSA, TOA, and IPMA prior to final design. Thirtypercent design plans will address intersection lane configurations, traffic control, striping, and transit treatments along the corridor and refined estimates of implementation costs. Preparefinaldesignplansuponapprovalof30percentplans(tobeledbyIPMA). CoordinatewithpartneragenciessuchastheMetropolitanPoliceDepartment,TOA,andDDOT Roadway Maintenance to determine needs and protocols for keyoperational elements such as enforcement, signal operation/transit priority, maintenance, and evacuation procedures.
April 2013
81
Section8
Coordination Activities
th
FinalReport
CoordinationMeetingswithDDOTStaff
Theworkundertakenforthe16thStreetNWprojectwaslargelyconductedthroughaseriesofmeetingsand workshop with the DDOT project team and agency representatives. These coordination efforts provided a forum for representatives from different divisions of DDOT to collaborate on alternatives, ask questions abouttheresultsofthetechnicalanalysis,andguidethedirectionoftheproject.Thisforumalsoallowedfor an exchange of ideas, knowledge and past experiences. This was imperative to ensuring all elements of the complicatedcorridorwerecomprehensivelyevaluatedandconsidered
ProjectMeetingSchedule
A project kickoff meeting as well as 8 coordination meetings between DDOT staff and the consultants took placebetweenJuly2010andDecember2011.Thesemeetingsprovidedtheopportunityforrepresentatives from DDOT to collaborate on the alternatives development process while vetting technical analysis completed by the consultants. Additional meetings also strategically incorporated key stakeholders to help move the project forward towards implementation. A summary of handouts and presentation materials fromeachmeetingisprovidedinaProjectMeetingNotebookseparatefromthisfinalreport. Table21summarizesthemeetingsthattookplaceduringthecourseoftheproject.
OutreachActivitiesNextStep
Thenextstepsforoutreachandcontinuedcoordinationincludethefollowing: CoordinatewithPDEandotherrelevantagenciestocompletetheNEPAprocess CoordinatewithPDEtobegintheDCEPAprocess Conductapublicopenhousetosummarizeresultsfromtheprojectandthepreferredalternative
April 2013
86
16 StreetCorridorProject
th
FinalDraft
Table21. Date July2010
CoordinationandPartnerMeetingsSummary Agenda/Description
Project Kickoff MeetingKick off meeting with DDOT to discuss work plan and schedule as well as open discussion on key issues, stakeholder involvement and alternatives and issuesexploredinthepast. Coordination meeting #1 Coordination meeting with DDOT for project status update and findings from literature review, field inventory and existing conditions review. Also discussedcommunicationsstrategyanddatacollectionplan.
August 2010
September Coordination meeting #2: Coordination meeting with DDOT to provide an overview of the needsassessmentandthedatacollectionplan. 2010 October 2010 Coordination meeting #3: Coordination meeting with DDOT to provide an overview of the datacollectioneffort.
November Coordination meeting #4: Coordination meeting with DDOT to identify preliminary breakoutprojects. 2010 January 2011 February 2011 April2011 Coordination meeting #5: Coordination meeting with DDOT to review corridor level alternativesandevaluationcriteriatools. Coordinationmeeting#6:CoordinationmeetingwithDDOT,DPWTooleDesignGroupand KAI to review the corridor configuration alternatives and the evaluation criteria methodology. Coordination meeting #7: Coordination meeting with DDOT to review the Person Throughput approach and provide an overview of the operations and safety analysis findings. ProjectbriefingwithADsandDirector. Projectdocumentssubmittedforreview.
June2011 July2011
November TOAReviewComments. 2011 December 2011 Coordination meeting #8: Coordination meeting with DDOT to review project progress andidentifynextstepsfordevelopingastrategicimplementationplan.
April2013
87

16th Street NW Corridor Project - Final Report April 2013

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

16th Street NW Corridor Project - Final Report April 2013

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

16th Street NW Corridor Project Final Report

List of Tables and Figures

EXISTING TYPICAL SECTION

PROJECT EVALUATION PROCESS SUMMARY

Identify Issues and Opportunities

Select Preferred Alternative

Extend the Reversible Lane

Peak-hour Peak-direction Transit Lane Between Arkansas Avenue to Park Road NW

ADDITIONAL SAFETY IMPROVEMENTS

Figure 1 illustrates the project study area as described.

TOR LEC COL

Regional Location of Corridor

Figure #: Corridor Overview K Street to Eastern Ave

1 inch = 1,100 feet