1 10 2 https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/13460/archive/files/d20f8593ea0a95d9d928d58efa802c34.pdf?Expires=1779321600&Signature=sHcwP5PCjYlcGF5uzWA6orKz-eqmoWYB6DlfMANzwu7%7EmyIpXbwe2pTs-kqBjWAbGnnNb50wnqzfLmnXOY3E5rNqs%7ETjKIqhORz-5RGEJ9cO32pnaQIlRbJnMdraHmzSFtUeQ-MyaWz2J4IJyeZnW0VibKyaHAJKlHP1Q1GZTjcR-dMt7ePNoyGR%7Ea32wYQIjTfrOsssyBfUoUENDwoPmrcZpEXkPRGP5KM2-gy7M5XobbRT15JOMBazTPidODW7xs7%7E1HHGv874S4O7gQGAQABuP-nPT7GUBUW0BZNwBwAcGLchFAuxpjAFl1VdTYN8hbiW8fEAwTxzfyxV8T9tfg__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM fc41dea7156e65e18cbc91805e63c47c PDF Text Text BUS PRIORITY LAMES for the Washington Metropolitan Area MAY, 1973 M e t r o p o l i t a n Washington Council of g o v e r n m e n t s Notional C a p i t a . Region Transportation Planmng Board ��BUS PRIORITY LANES for the Washington M e t r o p o l i t a n A r e a U n i f i e d Comprehensive Short-Range T r a n s i t Development Program The p r e p a r a t i o n o f t h i s r e p o r t has been f i n a n c e d i n p a r t through a g r a n t from t h e U.S. Department of T r a n s p o r t a t i o n , Urban Mass T r a n s p o r t a t i o n A d m i n i s t r a t i o n , under t h e Urban Mass T r a n s p o r t a t i o n A c t o f 1964, as amended. May 1973 METROPOLITAN WASHINGTON COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS NATIONAL CAPITAL REGION TRANSPORTATION PLANNING BOARD ��Table of Contents Page I. I I . I I I . IV. V. VI. VII. Numbers Introduction 1 Summary o f 4 Recommendations Recommended P h a s i n g 5 Criteria Types of 10 Bus P r i o r i t i e s Estimated Cost Conclusion of Recommendations 17 . . . 22 26 ��BUS PRIORITY LANES f o r t h e Washington M e t r o p o l i t a n I. Area INTRODUCTION The bus p r i o r i t y l a n e s d i s c u s s e d i n t h i s r e p o r t have been s t u d i e d a s p a r t o f t h e U n i f i e d Comprehensive Short-Range T r a n s i t Development Program f o r t h e Washington Metropolitan A r e a w i t h funding a s s i s t a n c e by t h e Urban Mass T r a n s p o r t a t i o n Administration (UMTA). T h i s r e p o r t was p r e p a r e d under t h e s u b j e c t i n Task l . g . Bus P r i o r i t y Lanes and S t r e e t s o f Study Design Element 1 . , Immediate A c t i o n Improvements t o t h e E x i s t i n g T r a n s i t System. I t i s intended t h a t t h e concepts and recommendations s e t f o r t h i n t h i s r e p o r t be c o n s i d e r e d the r e s p o n s i b l e a r e a agencies f o r implementation by and j u r i s d i c t i o n s . The r e p o r t ' s f i n d i n g s a l s o s e r v e a s a b a s i s f o r f u r t h e r d e t a i l i n g o f bus priorities. Proposals i n t h i s r e p o r t f o r t h e D i s t r i c t o f Columbia have been developed by COG/TPB s t a f f i n c o o p e r a t i o n D.C. Department o f Highways and T r a f f i c Washington M e t r o p o l i t a n Proposals with the (D.C. DH&T) and t h e Area T r a n s i t Authority (WMATA) s t a f f s . i n V i r g i n i a were developed by t h e Northern V i r g i n i a T r a n s p o r t a t i o n Commission cooperation (NVTC) under t h e UMTA program i n w i t h t h e A r l i n g t o n County Department o f T r a n s p o r t a t i o n . Bus p r i o r i t y l a n e s i n Maryland have been under study as p a r t of t h e UMTA U n i f i e d T r a n s i t Development Program by t h e Maryland- �-2- N a t i o n a l C a p i t a l Park and P l a n n i n g Commission (M-NCPPC). M-NCPPC, w i t h c o n s u l t a n t a s s i s t a n c e by P e a t , Marwick, M i t c h e l l & Co., i s conducting a study o f t r a n s i t improve- ments i n t h e two c o u n t i e s i n Maryland. They a r e a l s o t r e a t e d i n t h e work by the Maryland Department o f T r a n s p o r t a t i o n i n t h e "Western P r i n c e George's County T r a n s p o r t a t i o n A l t e r n a t i v e s Study." Valuable c o n t r i b u t i o n s t o t h i s r e p o r t have been made by WMATA, NVTC, DC DH&T, M-NCPPC, and the A r l i n g t o n County Department o f T r a n s p o r t a t i o n . Other a r e a agencies p l a y i n g an im- p o r t a n t r o l e a r e the Maryland Department o f T r a n s p o r t a t i o n and the V i r g i n i a Department o f Highways. C o n s i s t e n t w i t h t h e Study Design f o r t h e U n i f i e d Comprehensive Short-Range T r a n s i t Development Program, an attempt has been made t o i n t e g r a t e and c o n s o l i d a t e a l l e x i s t i n g and proposed bus p r i o r i t y planning s t u d i e s and p r o j e c t s i n t o t h e framework o f a c o o r d i n a t e d and comprehensive program. coordinated The recommended bus p r i o r i t i e s a r e w i t h the v a r i o u s phases o f METRO as they become operational. The recommendations i n t h i s r e p o r t a r e c o n s i s t e n t w i t h the bus l a n e improvements i n the 1972 C e r t i f i c a t i o n Certification Plan. The P l a n p o i n t s t o t h e c r i t i c a l need t o i n i t i a t e a comprehensive program o f s h o r t - r a n g e t r a n s i t improvements i n order t o h e l p reduce long range highway demands. METRO must be supplemented by a wide range o f e a r l y a c t i o n t r a n s i t improvements - bus p r i o r i t y l a n e s , commuter r a i l - i n order t o �-3- s i g n i f i c a n t l y a l t e r t r a v e l p a t t e r n s and h a b i t s and influence longer range development and t r a n s p o r t a t i o n p l a n s and The recommendations i n t h i s r e p o r t a r e a l s o c o n s i s t e n t w i t h the p r i o r i t y l a n e s proposed t o meet a i r q u a l i t y The programs. regional A i r Quality Planning standards. Committee (AQPC) proposed f i v e bus p r i o r i t i e s f o r the D i s t r i c t and e i g h t f o r suburban areas. More d e t a i l e d s p e c i f i c d a t a and a n a l y s e s have a l l o w e d f o r more d e t a i l e d p l a n n i n g w i t h r e s p e c t to t h e s e l a n e s . There- f o r e , c e r t a i n r e f i n e m e n t s have been made w i t h r e s p e c t to the f i v e bus l a n e c o r r i d o r s o r i g i n a l l y proposed i n the The P e n n s y l v a n i a Avenue, S.E. District. and the South C a p i t o l S t r e e t Urban C o r r i d o r s a r e i n c l u d e d . The proposed 13th S t r e e t bus p r i o r i t y l a n e i s r e p l a c e d by the Georgia Avenue - 7th and Streets corridor. The o v e r a l l p h y s i c a l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of Georgia Avenue c o r r i d o r a r e b e t t e r s u i t e d t o e f f e c t i v e p r i o r i t y movements. W i s c o n s i n Avenue as a proposed bus c o r r i d o r i s added i n s t e a d of t h e Georgetown B&O F i n a l l y , o n l y the New due 9th the bus priority Branch Busway. York Avenue p r i o r i t y needs a d d i t i o n a l study to the low volume of t r a n s i t buses u s i n g i t . An appendix to t h i s r e p o r t i s being p r e p a r e d which w i l l c o n t a i n more d e t a i l e d d e s c r i p t i o n s of the proposed bus lanes, i n c l u d i n g bus volumes, passenger volumes, t r a f f i c volumes, estimated time s a v i n g s , and bus routes served. �-4II. SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS D i s t r i c t o f Columbia: 22 new bus p r i o r i t y c o r r i d o r s a r e recommended, as f o l l o w s : 6 r e p r e s e n t e x t e n s i o n s o f p r e s e n t bus p r i o r i t y corridors 1 i s s u i t a b l e f o r busway and e x c l u s i v e e x p r e s s l a n e treatment 3 a r e s u i t a b l e f o r e x c l u s i v e e x p r e s s l a n e treatment 2 a r e s u i t a b l e f o r curb l a n e and e x c l u s i v e e x p r e s s l a n e treatment 16 a r e s u i t a b l e f o r curb l a n e t r e a t m e n t o n l y 2 a r e renewed o p e r a t i o n s o f l a n e s c u r r e n t l y suspended due to c o n s t r u c t i o n - 37 m i l e s o f s t r e e t s a r e recommended f o r new bus p r i o r i t y treatment in addition: 1 c u r r e n t l y e x i s t i n g curb l a n e i s recommended f o r i n c r e a s e d hours o f o p e r a t i o n 3 new curb l a n e s a r e recommended f o r s t r e e t segments c u r r e n t l y c o n t a i n i n g bus p r i o r i t i e s i n t h e o p p o s i t e curb l a n e 6 c o r r i d o r s a r e mentioned as m e r i t i n g f u r t h e r study o f t h e i r v i a b i l i t y as bus p r i o r i t i e s Virginia: 4 bus p r i o r i t y c o r r i d o r s a r e recommended as f o l l o w s : 4 a r e s u i t a b l e f o r curb l a n e t r e a t m e n t - 17 m i l e s o f s t r e e t s a r e recommended f o r new bus p r i o r i t y treatment in addition: 4 c o r r i d o r s a r e mentioned as m e r i t i n g f u r t h e r study o f t h e i r v i a b i l i t y as bus p r i o r i t i e s Maryland: 6 bus p r i o r i t y c o r r i d o r s a r e recommended a s f o l l o w s : 2 a r e s u i t a b l e f o r counter f l o w ( l o c a l and e x p r e s s s e r v i c e ) lane treatment 4 a r e s u i t a b l e f o r counter f l o w and curb l a n e t r e a t m e n t - 24 m i l e s o f s t r e e t s a r e recommended f o r new bus p r i o r i t y treatment �-5- III. RECOMMENDED PHASING Bus P r i o r i t i e s Recommended f o r F i r s t Stage Implementation (before December 3 1 , 1973) D i s t r i c t o f Columbia: 1. Key B r i d g e : e x c l u s i v e e x p r e s s l a n e (morning peak p e r i o d northbound, evening peak p e r i o d southbound) 2. M Street: curb l a n e between 34th and 2 9th S t r e e t s (morning peak p e r i o d eastbound) 3. 14th S t r e e t : o p e r a t i o n o f t h e e x i s t i n g curb l a n e n o r t h bound between D S t r e e t , S.W. and New York Avenue from 4-6 PM weekdays, i n a d d i t i o n t o t h e c u r r e n t 7-9 AM o p e r a t i o n 4. 14th S t r e e t : curb l a n e southbound between K S t r e e t and P e n n s y l v a n i a Avenue (morning and evening peak p e r i o d s ) 5. Sousa B r i d g e Pennsylvania Avenue, S.E.: e x c l u s i v e e x p r e s s l a n e on Sousa B r i d g e and curb l a n e s on P e n n s y l v a n i a Avenue, S.E. between F a i r l a w n Avenue and Southern Avenue (morning peak p e r i o d westbound, evening peak p e r i o d eastbound) 6. South C a p i t o l S t r e e t Urban Corridor: e x p r e s s bus l a n e between M S t r e e t , S.W. and South C a p i t o l S t r e e t ( A n a c o s t i a ) Busway; a l s o e x p r e s s bus l a n e a d j a c e n t t o and on South C a p i t o l S t r e e t between S u i t l a n d Parkway and Southern Avenue (morning peak p e r i o d northbound , evening peak p e r i o d southbound - Busway northbound only) 7. 9th S t r e e t E x p r e s s - e x c l u s i v e e x p r e s s l a n e southbound between C o n s t i t u t i o n Avenue and a p o i n t south o f way: D S t r e e t , S.W. (evening peak p e r i o d ) 8. Connecticut Avenue: curb l a n e s northbound and southbound between C a l v e r t S t r e e t and Northampton S t r e e t (morning peak p e r i o d southbound, evening peak p e r i o d northbound) �-6- Virginia: 9. 10. Wilson Boulevard (Arlington): curb l a n e s eastbound and westbound between N o r t h Moore S t r e e t and L e x i n g t o n S t r e e t (morning peak p e r i o d eastbound, e v e n i n g peak p e r i o d westbound) Lynn S t r e e t (Arlington): curb l a n e northbound between W i l s o n B o u l e v a r d and Lee Highway (morning peak p e r i o d ) Bus P r i o r i t i e s Recommended f o r Second S t a g e I m p l e m e n t a t i o n ( b e f o r e December 3 1 , 1974) D i s t r i c t o f Columbia: 1. Connecticut 2. G e o r g i a Avenue 7th and 9th S t s : e x c l u s i v e e x p r e s s l a n e on G e o r g i a Avenue between E a s t e r n Avenue and New Hampshire Avenue (morning peak p e r i o d southbound, e v e n i n g peak p e r i o d n o r t h b o u n d ) , curb l a n e s on G e o r g i a Avenue between E a s t e r n Avenue and B a r r y P l a c e ; curb l a n e on 7 t h S t r e e t northbound and on 9 t h S t r e e t southbound between B a r r y P l a c e and Penns y l v a n i a Avenue (morning peak p e r i o d s o u t h bound, e v e n i n g peak p e r i o d northbound) 3. H S t r e e t. E x tension: e x t e n d p r e s e n t curb l a n e s w e s t on H S t r e e t between 2nd S t r e e t , N.E. and 1 4 t h S t r e e t , N.W. (morning peak p e r i o d westbound, e v e n i n g peak p e r i o d eastbound) 4. Constitution Avenue: c u r b l a n e westbound between 6 t h and 1 7 t h S t r e e t s (morning and e v e n i n g peak p e r i o d s ) 5. 7th c u r b l a n e northbound between Independence Avenue and P e n n s y l v a n i a Avenue (morning and e v e n i n g peak p e r i o d s ) Street: Avenue: e x c l u s i v e e x p r e s s l a n e between P o r t e r S t r e e t and Belmont Road; e x c l u s i v e e x p r e s s l a n e between S S t r e e t and N S t r e e t (morning peak p e r i o d southbound, e v e n i n g peak p e r i o d n o r t h b o u n d ) ; curb l a n e s between Kalorama Road and F l o r i d a Avenue; curb l a n e s between N S t r e e t and K S t r e e t (morning peak p e r i o d southbound, e v e n i n g peak p e r i o d northbound) �-7- 6. 13th S t r e e t , 7. M S t r e e t , S • W. : c u r b l a n e s between South C a p i t o l S t r e e t and Maine Avenue (morning peak p e r i o d westbound, e v e n i n g peak p e r i o d eastbound) 8. 11th S t r e e t , curb l a n e s between H a r v a r d Road and P e n n s y l v a n i a Avenue (morning peak p e r i o d southbound and e v e n i n g peak p e r i o d northbound between K S t r e e t and H a r v a r d Road; morning and e v e n i n g peak p e r i o d s northbound and southbound between K S t r e e t and P e n n s y l v a n i a Avenue) 9. K Street, N.W.: N.W.: N.W.: curb l a n e s between P e n n s y l v a n i a Avenue and H S t r e e t (northbound) and K S t r e e t (southbound); (morning and e v e n i n g peak p e r i o d s southbound, e v e n i n g peak p e r i o d northbound) e x c l u s i v e curb l a n e s ( c e n t e r roadway) between 1 1 t h S t r e e t and 2 1 s t S t r e e t s (morning and e v e n i n g peak p e r i o d s eastbound and westbound) Vir ginia: 10. Arlington Boulevard: (Arlington) s e r v i c e r o a d s and curb l a n e s between P a t r i c k Henry D r i v e and P e r s h i n g D r i v e (morning peak p e r i o d e a s t b o u n d , e v e n i n g peak p e r i o d westbound. 11. Columbia P i k e (Arlington): curb l a n e s between L e e s b u r g P i k e and N a v a l Annex (morning peak p e r i o d e a s t b o u n d , e v e n i n g peak p e r i o d westbound) Maryland: 12. G e o r g i a Avenue ( S i l v e r SpringWheaton): c o u n t e r f l o w l a n e s between E a s t e r n Avenue and V i e r s M i l l Road (morning peak p e r i o d southbound, e v e n i n g peak p e r i o d northbound) 13. New Hampshire Avenue ( L a n g l e y Park) : c o u n t e r f l o w l a n e s between E a s t e r n Avenue and M e t z e r o t t Road (morning peak p e r i o d southbound, e v e n i n g peak p e r i o d northbound) 14. W i s c o n s i n Avenue (Bethesda): c o u n t e r flow l a n e s between Western Avenue and B a t t e r y Lane; curb l a n e s between B a t t e r y Lane and West Cedar Lane (morning peak p e r i o d southbound, e v e n i n g peak p e r i o d northbound) �-8- Bus P r i o r i t i e s Recommended f o r T h i r d Stage (before December 3 1 , 1 9 7 5 ) ~ Implementation D i s t r i c t o f Columbia: 1. W i s c o n s i n Avenue: curb l a n e s between Western Avenue and P S t r e e t (morning peak p e r i o d s o u t h bound, evening peak p e r i o d northbound) 2. 16th S t r e e t Extension: extend p r e s e n t curb l a n e s n o r t h o f F l o r i d a Avenue on 16th S t r e e t between F l o r i d i a Avenue and S p r i n g Road (morning peak p e r i o d southbound, evening peak p e r i o d northbound) 3. Eye S t r e e t : r e i n s t a t e p r e v i o u s eastbound curb l a n e between 17th and 13th S t r e e t s when c o n s t r u c t i o n p e r m i t s (morning and evening peak p e r i o d s ) 4. 14th S t r e e t : curb l a n e s between Thomas C i r c l e and K S t r e e t southbound and New York Avenue northbound (morning peak p e r i o d southbound, evening peak p e r i o d n o r t h bound) 5. 7th curb l a n e northbound between I S t r e e t , S.W. and Independence Avenue (morning peak p e r i o d e n t i r e segment, evening peak p e r i o d E S t r e e t , S.W. t o Independence Avenue) 6. Rhode I s l a n d Avenue: curb l a n e s between E a s t e r n Avenue and S c o t t C i r c l e (morning peak p e r i o d w e s t bound, evening peak p e r i o d eastbound) 7. P Street: curb l a n e s between 22nd and 20th S t r e e t s (morning peak p e r i o d eastbound, morning and evening peak p e r i o d westbound); curb l a n e between e n t r a n c e t o Rock Creek Parkway and W i s c o n s i n Avenue (evening peak p e r i o d westbound) 8. 12th S t r e e t Expressway: e x c l u s i v e e x p r e s s l a n e northbound between a p o i n t south of D S t r e e t , S.W. and C o n s t i t u t i o n Avenue (morning peak p e r i o d ) 9. F-G curb l a n e on F S t r e e t eastbound and on G S t r e e t westbound between 14th and 9th S t r e e t s (morning and evening peak p e r i o d eastbound and westbound; 11 AM - 1:00 PM eastbound and westbound) Street: Streets: �-9- Maryland: 10. C o l e s v i l l e Road ( S i l v e r SpringWhite Oak) : curb l a n e s between Georgia Avenue and S l i g o Creek Parkway; counter flow l a n e s between S l i g o Creek Parkway and White Oak (morning peak p e r i o d southbound, evening peak p e r i o d northbound) 11. Connecticut Avenue (Chevy Chase-Kensington): curb l a n e s between Western Avenue and Dunlop S t r e e t ; c o u n t e r f l o w l a n e s between Dunlop S t r e e t and U n i v e r s i t y Road (morning peak p e r i o d southbound, evening peak p e r i o d northbound) 12. Bladensburg Road: A n n a p o l i s Road (Mt. R a n i e r Lanham): curb l a n e s between E a s t e r n Avenue and A n n a p o l i s Road; c o u n t e r f l o w l a n e s between Bladensburg Road and t h e B e l t w a y (morning peak p e r i o d southbound, evening peak p e r i o d northbound). C o r r i d o r s f o r F u t u r e Study: D i s t r i c t o f Columbia: 1. 16th S t r e e t (above S p r i n g Road) 2. New Hampshire Avenue 3. A l a s k a Avenue 4. New York Avenue 5. B l a d e n s b u r g Road 6. Benning Road - E a s t C a p i t o l S t r e e t Virginia: The f o l l o w i n g a r e understudy by NVTC as p a r t o f t h e UMTA U n i f i e d T e c h n i c a l S t u d i e s Program : 1. Columbia P i k e 2. Lee Highway 3. R t 1 - George Washington Memorial Parkway 4. W O right-of-way &D Maryland: PEPCO r i g h t - o f - w a y and o t h e r s under study by Maryland DOT i n the Western P r i n c e George's County T r a n s p o r t a t i o n A l t e r n a t i v e s Study. �Map 1: E x i s t i n g Bus P r i o r i t y L a n e ( s ) Busway Curb L a n e ( s ) �Map 2: F i r s t Stage Proposed Bus P r i o r i t y L a n e ( s ) Busway H H M M Exclusive Express Lane(s) Curb L a n e ( s ) �Map 3: Second Stage Counter Proposed Bus P r i o r i t y Flow Lane(s) Exclusive Express Lane(s) Lane(s) Curb Lane(s) �Map 4: T h i r d Stage Proposed Bus P r i o r i t y L a n e ( s ) Counter Flow L a n e ( s ) E x c l u s i v e Express Lane(s) • H I M M Curb L a n e ( s ) �Map 5: Bus P r i o r i t y L a n e ( s ) - 1975 System Busway MB w M Curb L a n e ( s ) OOOO E x c l u s i v e Express Lane(s) Counter Flow L a n e ( s ) �-10IV. CRITERIA The bus p r i o r i t y l a n e s recommended i n t h i s r e p o r t have been grouped i n t o t h r e e c a t e g o r i e s , r e f l e c t i n g precedence and t i m i n g of implementation t h e recommended o f each group. Lanes i n t h e f i r s t stage c a t e g o r y a r e judged t o have the h i g h e s t degree of immediate p o s i t i v e impact on t r a n s i t s e r v i c e and t h e greatest f e a s i b i l i t y . implementation T h e r e f o r e , they a r e recommended f o r b e f o r e December 3 1 , 1973. The h i g h e s t degree of immediate p o s i t i v e impact means t h a t a bus p r i o r i t y lane shows s u b s t a n t i a l promise o f a l l e v i a t i n g a c u r r e n t s e v e r e time l o s t - d u e - t o - c o n g e s t i o n problem, o r o f p r o v i d i n g a c o r r i d o r where h i g h e r l e v e l s o f t r a n s i t s e r v i c e a r e f e a s i b l e w i t h good running times. The e v a l u a t i o n procedure i n c l u d e s an assessment o f t h e support p r e s e n t l y a v a i l a b l e from m e t r o p o l i t a n a r e a and agencies f o r t h e implementation p r i o r i t y lanes. jurisdictions of t h e v a r i o u s recommended However, support o f t h i s n a t u r e i s not the o n l y c r i t e r i o n which has been u t i l i z e d . The f o l l o w i n g l i s t contains the c r i t e r i a used i n t h i s r e p o r t : 1. The volume of buses c u r r e n t l y u s i n g t h e s t r e e t segment. A minimum o f 40 buses p e r hour i s suggested town bus l a n e s . suggested 2. f o r down- Lower p r i o r i t y t h r e s h o l d l e v e l s a r e f o r c e r t a i n a r t e r i a l and suburban bus l a n e s . The p o t e n t i a l f o r new bus s e r v i c e s which could be developed t o t a k e advantage o f t h e l a n e . Bus l a n e s o f f e r unique o p p o r t u n i t i e s t o develop t r a n s i t services t o new a r e a s and t o enhance p r e s e n t l e v e l s o f s e r v i c e . �-11- 3. C u r r e n t passenger volumes f o r buses u s i n g t h e s t r e e t segment under c o n s i d e r a t i o n f o r a bus l a n e . 4. Probable i n c r e a s e s i n passenger volumes generated by implementation o f t h e l a n e . These i n c r e a s e s can be generated by more passengers u s i n g c u r r e n t l y scheduled b u s e s , o r new t r a n s i t s e r v i c e s developed to t a k e advantage o f t h e unique o p p o r t u n i t i e s o f f e r e d by t h e p r i o r i t y l a n e . 5. The p o l i t i c a l f e a s i b i l i t y o f implementing t h e bus l a n e , i n c l u d i n g t h e p u b l i c ' s acceptance o f t h e l a n e , and l a t e n t o p p o s i t i o n from people l o c a t e d on s t r e e t s on which i t i s developed. 6. The l a n d use c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f t h e a r e a s e r v e d by the s t r e e t segment under c o n s i d e r a t i o n e r c i a l or r e s i d e n t i a l , e t c . ) . ( i . e . comm- The l e v e l o f t r a n s i t s e r v i c e should not v i o l a t e t h e c h a r a c t e r imposed by major l a n d uses on t h e s t r e e t . Commercial o r i n - d u s t r i a l s t r e e t s a r e f a v o r e d over r e s i d e n t i a l t o convey l a r g e members o f buses i n t h e f i r s t i n s t a n c e . 7. The p h y s i c a l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f t h e s t r e e t o r h i g h way under c o n s i d e r a t i o n , i n c l u d i n g t h e number o f a v a i l a b l e l a n e s , c h a n n a l i z a t i o n and c e n t e r median layouts. S t r e e t s w i t h greater lane capacity i n the d i r e c t i o n o f peak f l o w a r e f a v o r e d i n order t o minimize d i s r u p t i v e impacts on o v e r a l l t r a f f i c E x i s t i n g and proposed t r a f f i c and p a r k i n g must a l s o be c o n s i d e r e d characteristics. flow. restrictions as p a r t o f t h e p h y s i c a l �-12- 8. The amount o f time which w i l l probably be saved by an average bus u s i n g t h e l a n e . T h i s f i g u r e can i n t u r n be used t o c a l c u l a t e t h e s a v i n g s i n t o t a l bus minutes and t o t a l passenger minutes generated. Another important parameter i s t h e time saved p e r l a n e m i l e , e.g. s a v i n g 10 minutes w i t h a l a n e one m i l e long i s p r e f e r a b l e t o s a v i n g t h e same amount of time w i t h a l a n e two m i l e s long. 9. The degree o f peak p e r i o d (morning and evening) congestion traffic as measured by peak p e r i o d t r a f f i c volumes and d i r e c t i o n a l t r a f f i c s p l i t s , and t r a f f i c p e r l a n e per hour c a l c u l a t i o n s . 10. F u t u r e c o o r d i n a t i o n w i t h METRO. The v i a b i l i t y o f each l a n e must be reviewed as each segment o f METRO opens. Some w i l l l o s e t h e i r importance w h i l e o t h e r s w i l l o f f e r s u b s t a n t i a l c o n t r i b u t i o n s on bus dominated t r a n s i t c o r r i d o r s o r METRO " f e e d e r " c o r r i d o r s . Present METRO c o n s t r u c t i o n a r e a s a l s o have an impact on implement a t i o n i n c a s e s where i t must be delayed u n t i l cons t r u c t i o n a c t i v i t i e s a r e completed. Based on these c r i t e r i a , recommended l a n e s a r e a l s o a s s i g n e d t o second and t h i r d s t a g e c a t e g o r i e s . Lanes i n t h e second c a t e g o r y a r e important t r a n s i t improvements w i t h l e s s immediate p o s i t i v e impact, o r l e s s chance o f being c o n s t r u c t e d , o r financed. They should be u r g e n t l y c o n s i d e r e d , however, as t h e i r b e n e f i t t o t h e r e g i o n by 1975 would be s u b s t a n t i a l . T h i r d stage �-13- l a n e s show promise o f important c o n t r i b u t i o n s to a f u t u r e t r a n s i t system of maximum p u b l i c s e r v i c e impact, p a r t i c u l a r l y i f g a s o l i n e shortages and c l e a n a i r r e s t r i c t i o n s impose un- f o r e s e e a b l y h i g h l e v e l s o f home-to-work t r i p s by bus. I n a s s i g n i n g bus l a n e s t o t h e t h r e e implementation s t a g e s , t h e h i g h e s t degree of immediate p o s i t i v e impact c e n t e r s on a c o n s i d e r a t i o n o f t h e c r i t e r i a of p r e s e n t bus and passenger volumes, immediate average time s a v i n g s , and the c u r r e n t f e a s i b i l i t y of implementation. Those l a n e s which have h i g h e r a s s o c i a t e d volumes, promise more time s a v i n g s , and a r e p r e s e n t l y f e a s i b l e f o r s w i f t e r implementation a r e ranked h i g h e r than o t h e r s w i t h l e s s i m p r e s s i v e p a r a m e t e r s . However, c e r t a i n promising l a n e s a r e hampered by ongoing METRO c o n s t r u c t i o n , and a r e thus a s s i g n e d t o a l a t e r stage than would o t h e r w i s e be t h e c a s e . Bus Volume and Passenger C a p a c i t y C r i t e r i a F o r Bus P r i o r i t i e s The two p r i n c i p a l c r i t e r i a i n e s t a b l i s h i n g l a n e s a r e the number o f passengers and t h e number o f buses t o be conveyed. S i n c e t o t a l t r a n s p o r t a t i o n c a p a c i t y i s important, t h e passenger c a r r y i n g c a p a c i t y of a bus l a n e should equal or exceed t h e passenger c a r r y i n g c a p a c i t y o f t h e l a n e i f i t remained f o r automobiles' u s e . Enough bus t r i p s should be provided of time t o j u s t i f y t h e l a n e . per u n i t As w i l l be shown i n t h i s s e c t i o n , only a r e l a t i v e l y modest number of bus t r i p s p e r hour a r e needed t o e s t a b l i s h s u p e r i o r i t y , e v e n i f c a r p o o l i n g average auto occupancy r a t e s above p r e s e n t rates. produces �A s e t of c o n s i d e r a t i o n r e l a t e d t o the number of buses concerns p u b l i c a t t i t u d e towards bus l a n e s . I f t h e number of buses i s too low and thus t h e headways between buses a r e o v e r l y l o n g , a bus l a n e may appear t o be u n d e r - u t i l i z e d and a l s o be harder to enforce. The measure o f s i x t y buses p e r peak hour i s o f t e n encountered as a s t a n d a r d f o r t h e implementation o f a bus lane. The passenger c a r r y i n g c a p a c i t y o f t h i s l e v e l o f t r a n s i t s e r v i c e f a r exceeds t h e number o f people l i k e l y t o be c a r r i e d i n a l a n e by automobiles. I f t h e average occupancy of an automobile i s assumed t o be 1.6 persons and a c i t y s t r e e t p e r l a n e p e r hour f l o w r a t e i s c o n s i d e r e d t o be 600 v e h i c l e s p e r hour, i t can be seen t h a t a l a n e of automobiles has a passenger c a r r y i n g c a p a c i t y o f 960 persons p e r hour. Should c a r p o o l i n g r a i s e t h e average occupancy t o 2.0 o r 2.5 persons per c a r t h e auto l a n e per hour c a p a c i t i e s would r i s e t o 1200 and 1500 r e s p e c t i v e l y . I f t h e s t a n d a r d of 60 buses (50 s e a t s ) p e r hour i s u t i l i z e d f o r a bus l a n e , 3000 t r a n s i t s e a t s p e r hour a r e p r o v i d e d by t h e p r i o r i t y lane. An average l o a d f a c t o r of o n l y 60% would c a r r y 1800 a t t h i s headway l e v e l . I n r e a l i t y t h e d i f f e r e n t i a l i n f a v o r o f t r a n s i t on Washington s t r e e t s i s h i g h e r than s p e c i f i e d i n t h e p r e v i o u s examples. P r e l i m i n a r y a n a l y s i s has d i s c l o s e d t h a t downtown s t r e e t s r e a c h c o n g e s t i o n a t t h e l e v e l o f 500 v e h i c l e s p e r l a n e per hour. I n a d d i t i o n , load f a c t o r s f o r peak d i r e c t i o n peak �-15hour b u s e s average above 80% f o r t h e morning r u s h , and average peak hour automobile occupancy i s o n l y about 1.54. Thus w h i l e a l a n e o f 60 buses p e r hour would c a r r y over 2400 p a s s e n g e r s a t conveyed t h i s l e v e l , o n l y 770 o c c u p a n t s would be by a l a n e o f c a r s . In a specific case, recent i n f o r m a t i o n r e l e a s e d by t h e D.C. Department o f Highways shows t h a t 80% o f t h e people b e i n g conveyed northbound on 1 4 t h S t r e e t a t C o n s t i t u t i o n Avenue d u r i n g t h e morning peak a r e bus p a s s e n g e r s and t h a t t h e c a r s e r v e s o n l y 20%. I n t h e e v e n i n g peak, l i k e f i g u r e s a r e 79% bus and 2 1 % c a r . T h e r e f o r e , i t can e a s i l y be seen t h a t t h e a c t u a l p a s s e n g e r s c a r r i e d and t h e t o t a l p a s s e n g e r c a p a c i t y o f a bus l a n e a t 60 buses p e r hour f a r exceed t h e people conveyed by a l a n e o f c a r s , even i f g r e a t e r l e v e l s o f c a r p o o l i n g a r e achieved. I t i s i m p o r t a n t t o note t h a t t h e d i f f e r e n t i a l s i n f a v o r of t h e bus c a n be m a i n t a i n e d a t headways lower t h a n 60 b u s e s p e r hour. (50 slightly F o r example 40 buses p e r hour s e a t s ) a t an a v e r a g e l o a d f a c t o r o f o n l y 75% convey 1500 p a s s e n g e r s w h i l e 600 c a r s a t an average occupancy o n l y 960. the Since this lower bus p e r hour parameter bus l a n e a s u b s t a n t i a l c a p a c i t y advantage s h a l l be u s e d as t h i s o f 1.6 c a r r y s t i l l gives over the auto, i t r e p o r t ' s s t a n d a r d f o r downtown bus l a n e s . T h i s p r o v i d e s a more s u b s t a n t i a l p l a n n i n g l e v e r i n l a y i n g o u t the l a n e s which w i l l be needed t o g i v e t h e c o r e t h e t r a n s i t system i t needs by 1975. �-16I t i s r e a l i s t i c t o adhere to the headway s t a n d a r d of 40 buses per hour on major s t r e e t s i n the downtown a r e a . However s t r i c t adherence t o t h i s s t a n d a r d p r o h i b i t s a bus lane on most a r t e r i a l s t r e e t s l e a d i n g t o the c i t y ' s c o r e . Such a bus volume s t a n d a r d i s h i g h i n r e l a t i o n t o suburban bus o p e r a t i o n s T h e r e f o r e c o n s i d e r a t i o n should be g i v e n t o implementing bus l a n e segments a t bus volume l e v e l s below 40 buses per hour on a r t e r i a l and suburban c o r r i d o r s which would e s p e c i a l l y b e n e f i t from b e t t e r t r a n s i t s e r v i c e . I n t h i s manner s u p e r i o r bus s e r v i c e f o r the e n t i r e m e t r o p o l i t a n r e g i o n would be s t i m u l a t e d The bus volume c r i t e r i a f o r each a r t e r i a l and suburban s t r e e t segment should t h e r e f o r e r e f l e c t the unique needs of t h a t segment f o r improved t r a n s i t s e r v i c e . I n t h i s manner the p o t e n t i a l f o r i n c r e a s e d t r a n s i t s e r v i c e would be enhanced. �-17V. TYPES OF BUS PRIORITY LANES There a r e a v a r i e t y of bus p r i o r i t y s t r a t e g i e s which can be used t o p r o v i d e b e t t e r t r a n s i t s e r v i c e , ranging bus from curb l a n e s w i t h v a r i o u s degrees of t r a n s i t e x c l u s i v e n e s s t o e x c l u s i v e busways occupying t h e i r own rights-of-way. A number of t r a d e - o f f s are i n v o l v e d i n the p r o c e s s of s e l e c t i n g the type of bus l a n e most s u i t a b l e to any g i v e n s i t u a t i o n . First, i n i t i a l c o s t s of e s t a b l i s h i n g or c o n s t r u c t i n g the l a n e must be considered. The p o s i t i v e impact of the v a r i o u s types of on t r a n s i t o p e r a t i o n s lanes i s a second i n v o l v e d t r a d e - o f f , the w i t h complete or h i g h e r degrees of t r a n s i t lanes exclusiveness a s s u r i n g b e t t e r performances than l a n e s w i t h l i m i t e d t r a n s i t exclusiveness. D i r e c t l y r e l a t e d a r e t r a d e - o f f s i n v o l v i n g en- forcement a g a i n s t encroachment of v e h i c l e s i n e l i g i b l e to the l a n e . use E x c l u s i v e busways p r e s e n t minimum enforcement problems; curb l a n e s w i t h p e r m i t t e d p e n e t r a t i o n by n o n - t r a n s i t modes generate d i f f i c u l t enforcement problems; and median l a n e s i n between t h e s e extremes. Of g r e a t importance, a l s o , i s the e f f e c t on the s t r e e t where the bus The type of bus i s accorded p r i o r i t y s e r v i c e u s i n g the l a n e w i l l a l s o have an on the k i n d of l a n e s e l e c t e d . by busways or e x c l u s i v e e x p r e s s to buses making f r e q u e n t fall E x p r e s s buses are i d e a l l y lanes. l o c a l stops. treatment. effect served Curb l a n e s are b e s t s u i t e d F i n a l l y , the impact of a l a n e on e n v i r o n m e n t a l f a c t o r s - n o i s e , v i b r a t i o n , a i r p o l l u t i o n (or the r e d u c t i o n of these) i s an i m p o r t a n t t r a d e - o f f . R e v e r s i b l e Lanes Buses can make use of s i n g l e d i r e c t i o n or r e v e r s i b l e l a n e s . For a s i x l a n e road w i t h no median, r e v e r s i n g l a n e s permits �-18o p e r a t i n g a four/two lane c o n f i g u r a t i o n i n the f a v o r of heavy t r a f f i c f l o w d u r i n g each of the peak p e r i o d s . For a f o u r l a n e road, a three/one l a n e c o n f i g u r a t i o n would c o n s t i t u t e a r e v e r s i b l e lane s t r a t e g y . Where the bus has p r i o r i t y i n a curb l a n e , the r e v e r s i b l e l a n e w i l l convey g e n e r a l t r a f f i c . Where the l a n e must c a t e r t o e x c l u s i v e e x p r e s s buses making no s t o p s , the r e v e r s i b l e l a n e may l a n e , and may t r a f f i c only. be d e s i g n a t e d curb as an e x p r e s s bus even be marked as r e s e r v e d f o r peak hour bus Counterflow r e v e r s i b l e l a n e s on the f a r s i d e s of c e n t e r medians p r o v i d e good t r a n s i t times and are not d i f f i c u l t to enforce. R e v e r s i b l e l a n e s permit implementation w h i l e r e t a i n i n g the number of l a n e s p r e v i o u s l y a v a i l a b l e to automobiles i n the d i r e c t i o n of peak f l o w . T h i s s i t u a t i o n does not e x i s t i n c a s e s where a s t r e e t has r e v e r s i b l e l a n e s p r i o r t o bus t a t i o n or where peak p e r i o d t r a f f i c f l o w s are lane implemen- approximately equal i n both d i r e c t i o n s and r e v e r s i n g i s i n f e a s i b l e . Curb Lanes Curb bus l a n e s a r e the s i m p l e s t and l e a s t e x p e n s i v e to e s t a b l i s h , c o s t i n g from as low as $1,200 t o type approximately $3,000 per m i l e i f l i g h t e d overhead s i g n s a r e not used. f o r e , i t i s not s u r p r i s i n g t h a t t h i s type accounts There- f o r the l a r g e m a j o r i t y of l a n e s e x i s t i n g and proposed i n the Washington metropolitan area. Curb l a n e s can be used on one-way or two-way s t r e e t s to convey t r a n s i t i n the d i r e c t i o n of t r a f f i c f l o w i n the a d j o i n i n g l a n e . A s p e c i a l k i n d of curb l a n e would be a c o u n t e r f l o w l a n e , conveying t r a n s i t i n the d i r e c t i o n opposite the normal t r a f f i c f l o w on a one-way s t r e e t . This strategy �-19has been used s u c c e s s f u l l y i n H a r r i s b u r g , P e n n s y l v a n i a , Madison, Wisconsin, and L o u i s v i l l e , Kentucky i n c o n j u n c t i o n w i t h t r a n s i t volumes of l e s s than t h i r t y buses p e r hour. Counterflow lanes have a l s o been used i n numerous p l a c e s here and abroad w i t h more s u b s t a n t i a l bus volumes. S t r e e t s i d e s i g n s and s p e c i a l l a n e markings a r e n o r m a l l y used t o i d e n t i f y curb bus l a n e s . I n c a s e s where a g r e a t e r l e v e l of i d e n t i f i c a t i o n i s needed because o f l a n e enforcement o r s a f e t y problems, overhead s i g n s can be used. P r e p a r a t i o n and e r e c t i o n o f l i g h t e d overhead warning s i g n s under c o n s i d e r a t i o n f o r Washington may c o s t as much as $5,000 p e r b l o c k o f l a n e , i f such s i g n i n g i s p l a c e d a t f r e q u e n t i n t e r v a l s . I t i s common to a l l o w o t h e r v e h i c l e s t o make r i g h t hand t u r n s a t s e l e c t e d i n t e r s e c t i o n s from curb bus l a n e s i n t h e normal f l o w d i r e c t i o n and t o load and d i s c h a r g e passengers - p r a c t i c e s which complicate p r i o r i t y enforcement. can be expected S m a l l e r t r a n s i t time s a v i n g s from curb l a n e s than from e x c l u s i v e e x p r e s s l a n e s o r busways. E x c l u s i v e E x p r e s s Lanes An e x c l u s i v e e x p r e s s l a n e i s designed t o improve through bus movement on s t r e e t s and highways. i n t h e d i r e c t i o n o f peak t r a f f i c express lane. U s u a l l y the inner lane f l o w w i l l become t h e e x c l u s i v e I n many c a s e s t h i s w i l l be a r e v e r s i b l e l a n e taken from t h e d i r e c t i o n o f l i g h t t r a f f i c flow. I n some s i t u a t i o n s where a c e n t e r median e x i s t s , t h e e x c l u s i v e ( r e v e r s i b l e ) l a n e can be e s t a b l i s h e d on t h e f a r s i d e o f t h e median. express I f the median i s o f s u f f i c i e n t w i d t h , bus bays can be c o n s t r u c t e d t o service l o c a l stops. The e x c l u s i v e bus l a n e can convey both �-20l o c a l and e x p r e s s buses. This s i t u a t i o n i s applicable to certain Maryland C o r r i d o r s and i s r e f e r r e d t o as a c o u n t e r f l o w this report. lane i n S i n c e t h i s type o f lane i s e x c l u s i v e t o buses, minimal enforcement problems and s u b s t a n t i a l t r a n s i t time s a v i n g s can be expected. E x c l u s i v e e x p r e s s l a n e s can convey i n t e r c i t y as w e l l as t r a n s i t buses. E x p e r i m e n t a t i o n w i t h t h e use o f c e r t a i n e x p r e s s bus l a n e s by c a r p o o l s c a r r y i n g t h r e e o r more occupants may be j u s t i f i e d . The l a n e must be p h y s i c a l l y s e p a r a t e d from o t h e r l a n e s c a r r y i n g c a r s i n order t o make enforcement p o s s i b l e . Where a c e n t e r median e x i s t s , i t can be removed i n f a v o r of an e x c l u s i v e e x p r e s s l a n e , w h i c h w i l l be r e v e r s i b l e disadvantaging t h e d i r e c t i o n of l i g h t t r a f f i c flow. without An e x c l u s i v e e x p r e s s l a n e can a l s o be e s t a b l i s h e d i n t h e o u t s i d e l a n e , provided r i g h t t u r n s by t r a f f i c a r e r e s t r i c t e d and c l o s e l y p o l i c e d . The c o s t o f e s t a b l i s h i n g an e x c l u s i v e e x p r e s s l a n e i n t h e Washington a r e a i s i n t h e neighborhood o f $20,000 - $40,000 p e r m i l e . c o s t s can be expected Lower i f t h e curb l a n e i s used under c o n d i t i o n s of proper r e g u l a t i o n . Busways Busways a r e l a n e s w h i c h operate on t h e i r own r i g h t s - o f - w a y . These r i g h t s - o f - w a y may be developed w i t h i n t h e design of a freeway f a c i l i t y o r p a r a l l e l t o an a r t e r i a l , o r they may be con- s t r u c t e d i n s p e c i a l c o r r i d o r s such as an abandoned o r l i g h t l y used r a i l r o a d l i n e . Bus bays can be b u i l d i n c o n j u n c t i o n w i t h t h e busway, p e r m i t t i n g t h e f a c i l i t y t o s e r v e l o c a l as w e l l as e x p r e s s buses. A busway i s an e x p e n s i v e f a c i l i t y t o b u i l d , w i t h con- s t r u c t i o n c o s t s i n t h e Washington a r e a r a n g i n g near $300,000 p e r m i l e , e x c l u s i v e o f r i g h t - o f - w a y land a c q u i s i t i o n . �-21However, s u b s t a n t i a l t r a n s i t time s a v i n g s a r e p o s s i b l e and enforcement problems a r e n e g l i g i b l e e s p e c i a l l y where t r a n s i t a c t i v a t e d gates p r o t e c t e x t r a n c e p o i n t s . I n s i t u a t i o n s where c e n t r a l b u s i n e s s d i s t r i c t a r e c o n v e r t e d i n t o shoppers' streets m a l l s , s p e c i a l l a n e s can be p r o v i d e d w i t h i n t h e m a l l d e s i g n f o r t h e use o f midibuses o r conventional t r a n s i t . The r e d e s i g n o f F and G S t r e e t s , and s e l e c t e d b i s e c t i n g s t r e e t s , f o l l o w i n g METRO c o n s t r u c t i o n w i l l o f f e r an o p p o r t u n i t y f o r t h i s type o f s t r a t e g y . When bus volumes r e a c h s u f f i c i e n t l e v e l s , bus s t r e e t s can be implemented. One type o f bus s t r e e t would not be t o t a l l y o f f l i m i t s to other t r a f f i c . L o c a l t r a f f i c would be p e r m i t t e d b u t through t r a f f i c would be banned. V e h i c l e s other than buses would be r e q u i r e d t o make a r i g h t t u r n from t h e s t r e e t every other block. T h i s enables any v e h i c l e t o r e a c h any b l o c k f a c e , b u t d i s c o u r a g e s f u l l use o f t h e s t r e e t s by v e h i c l e s o t h e r than buses. Another type o f bus s t r e e t would be a more e x c l u s i v e v a r i e t y , w i t h automobiles banned e x c e p t f o r p o s s i b l e s e r v i c e l a n e s t o major o f f - s t r e e t p a r k i n g o r shopping f a c i l i t i e s . T r u c k d e l i v e r y and t a x i s e r v i c e might be a l l o w e d on such d u r i n g c e r t a i n hours. for p h y s i c a l redesign. streets T h i s type o f bus s t r e e t i s a c a n d i d a t e A d d i t i o n a l bus s e r v i c e a r e a s , such as median l o a d i n g p l a t f o r m s , c o u l d be i n c o r p o r a t e d i n t o t h e d e s i g n . Bus s t r e e t s c o u l d a l s o be used as bus l a y - o v e r a r e a s . �-22VI. ESTIMATED COSTS OF RECOMMENDATIONS The e s t i m a t e d c a p i t a l c o s t s presented below r e f l e c t t h e cost f i g u r e s discussed e a r l i e r f o r the establishment types o f bus p r i o r i t y l a n e s . of v a r i o u s They a r e e x c l u s i v e o f r i g h t - of-way l a n d a c q u i s i t i o n o r t h e purchase o f a d d i t i o n a l buses. The f o l l o w i n g approximate u n i t c o s t s a r e used f o r t h e Washington a r e a : 1. Curb l a n e s $1,200 - $3,000 d o l l a r s p e r m i l e , depending on t h e number and types o f c u r b s i d e s i g n s needed and t h e r e q u i s i t e amount o f l a n e p a i n t i n g . 2. Overhead l i g h t e d s i g n s $4,000 - $5,000 p e r u n i t 3. E x c l u s i v e e x p r e s s l a n e s $20,000 p e r m i l e . 4. E x c l u s i v e express lanes i n the counterflow d i r e c t i o n $20,000 t o $40,000 depending on t h e c o n s t r u c t i o n r e quired f o r s a f e t y - separation of the express 5. Busways $300,000 p e r m i l e lane. ( e x c l u s i v e of right-of-way l a n d a c q u i s i t i o n s and major s t r u c t u r e s such as b r i d g e construction) �-23ESTTMATED COSTS OF F I R S T STAGE LANES 1. Key Bridge $ 16,000 2. M Street 3. Sousa B r i d g e 700 16,000 Pennsylvania S.E. Ave, 4. 14th S t r e e t (exte:rtded hour s) 900 5. 14th S t r e e t (sout!tibound l a.ne) 600 6. South C a p i t o l Cor:r i d o r * 7. 9th S t r e e t 8. C o n n e c t i c u t Avenu 9. Wilson Boulevard 10. 3,700 Expres;sway Lynn S t r e e t 19,700 380,000 1,000 8,400 150,000 700 TOT,P L ^ $ 578,000 * does not i n c l u d e c o s t s o f r e c o n s t r u c t i o n Douglass B r i d g e ; and w i d e n i n g o f i n c l u d e s c o s t o f e x c l u s i v e e x p r e s s l a n e on the r e b u i l t b r i d g e . ESTIMATED COST OF SECOND STAGE LANES 1. C o n n e c t i c u t Avenue $ 60,000 2. Georgia Avenue ( 7 t h and 9 t h S t r e e t s ) 3. H Street 4. Constitution 5. 7th 6. 13th Street 1,300 7. 11th Street 10,000 8. M Street, 9. K Street 10. Arlington 150,000 4,000 Avenue Street 1,500 700 S.W. 1,500 50,000 Boulevard 850,000 �-Z4- 11. Columbia P i k e $ 150,000 12. G e o r g i a Avenue (Maryland) 195,000 13. New Hampshire Avenue (Maryland) 112,000 14. W i s c o n s i n Avenue (Maryland) TOTAL 60,000 $1,646,000 ESTIMATED COSTS OF THIRD STAGE LANES 1. Rhode I s l a n d Avenue $ 12,000 12 ,000 2. Eye S t r e e t Eye S t r e e t 3. 12th Expressway 12th S t r e e t Expressway 4. W i s c o n s i n Avenue 5. P Street Street 5 ,000 5,000 6. Streets F-G S t r e e t s 1 ,500 1,500 7. 16th S t r e e t 16th S t r e e t 3 ,600 3,600 8. 14thh S t r e e t 14t S t r e e t 1 ,200 1,200 9. 7thh S t r e e t 7t S t r e e t 800 105 ,000 105,000 10 ,000 10,000 900 10. C o n n e c t i c u t Avenue (Maryland)146 ,000 cut (Maryland)146,000 11. C o l e s v i l l e Road (Maryland) 70 ,000 70,000 12. Bladensburg-Annapolis Rd. 125 ,000 125,000 TOTAL $ 481,000 481 ,000 I n summary, t h e c o s t s by s t a g e s f o r t h e implementation of t h e bus l a n e s recommended r i n t h i s r e p o r t a r e as f o l l o w s : �-25- Stage M i l e s o f Lane First 17 Second 35 1,646,000 Third 26 481,000 78 $ 2,705,000 Implementation Cost $ 578,000 J u r i s d i c t i o n a l c o s t breakdowns by s t a t i o n f o r the recommended bus l a n e s a r e as f o l l o w s : Jurisdiction M i l e s o f Lane Implementation Cost D i s t r i c t of Columbia 37 Virginia 17 1,150,700 Maryland 24 708,000 78 2,705,000 $ 846,300 �-26- VII. CONCLUSION From the c o s t s presented above i t i s apparent t h a t most of the bus p r i o r i t y l a n e s i n t h i s r e p o r t can e s t a b l i s h e d a t r e l a t i v e l y low c o s t s . advantage which can be provided The be considerable to t r a n s i t over c u r r e n t o p e r a t i n g c o n d i t i o n s and the improvement i n a i r q u a l i t y are i n c e n t i v e s f o r e a r l y implementation of a bus vigorous l a n e program i n the Washington a r e a . The appendix to t h i s r e p o r t w i l l i n c l u d e f u r t h e r d e t a i l e d d e s c r i p t i o n s of the proposed bus lanes, including bus volumes, passenger volumes, t r a f f i c volumes, e s t i m a t e d time s a v i n g s , and bus r o u t e s b e n e f i t i n g . ���� Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Bus priority lanes for the Washington metropolitan area : Unified comprehensive short-range transit development program Subject The topic of the resource Bus lanes Description An account of the resource The preparation of this report was financed in part, through a grant from the U.S. Department, of Transportation, Urban Mass Transportation Administration, under the Urban Mass Transportation Act of 1964, as amended. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments National Capital Region Transportation Planning Board Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource May 1973 Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource United States. Department of Transportation. Urban Mass Transportation Administration Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource Documents Language A language of the resource English Type The nature or genre of the resource Text https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/13460/archive/files/139a9a51c220e1cefa7ea493f822ba47.pdf?Expires=1779321600&Signature=uCBGZ8decvGAY%7E1mPr1%7EGWqwWT-rDQozNc7EQXLYwY-CoHRGS2nXxck%7E09bM05cuNFER5NZkoHOC8bDcUXGWqWPQYucyF1TTAgOMM9aWLycdKhmNwzwIQGwbgANg9Xrw6g8%7EsC9qyeiVIDMgnqBxChI26p7YiedE5qhYBaKwkzcIUDM9qbfMy6O972R6XPv6Np-R%7EiP3Li7lNbP5D%7ExFAmU1Wer7LIGnRfPxUck9eTHL7XGFgJUb7jAiqFAdyj5ktBoboZBfUwMaOwMmA6bTtWJqCe-H6D-bAuK57SLhcn7Adp8iep8GOHJ8uk544Tbf2taAqITjIK3XZnpad3KUXg__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM 2a783d6324b7331bccee6065872813c6 PDF Text Text TABLE OF CONTENTS page INTRODUCTION SECTION -"--- I: | S PRIORIlY lmportance of lob, THEORY AND PRACTICE travel times vîa People carrying capacity Higher levels Downtown Trans Ai r it of parking of bus urban streets bus service ------ -- advantages 6 ---------- ll of downtown D.C. ll pol I ut ion Ut¡ I ity of transportation modes l2 Effective use of city streets by the various modes 13 Factors in designing bus priority strategies ----------- l4 Trucks and taxis ----------- 15 Location of bus stops ---: 16 Parking facilities r6 , ïraffic engíneering -Location of, bus priority strategies (cities) l8 San FrancÌsco Los Angeles New r8 -- York ---¡----! Boston San Juan Roches ter Minneapol is -- --------- ----- 19 20 �Page Bus lanes in the District of Columbia ------ Suggested Georgetown buswaY route Suggested express bus improvements --'------Bus advantage at signalized intersections -------------- South Capitol Street (Urban Corridor Program) 2l K Street Sh i rl ey I'lighwaY buswaY Present D.C. bus lanes Factors influencing present SECTION I l: BUS Right-hand, PR ORITY MOD ELS -'-- lanes FOR 29 3t+ DOT.'NTOT.'N T.'ASH I turn co¡fl icts 34 ----.--------Color code for hours of bus lane'operation Bus lane crossovers Bus lane signs ---------- 36 -------" 36 Ciossover permit fees Q Street between l,Iisconsin Avenue and 22nd Street ------ \^lisconsin Avenue between R Street and M Street Key Bridge M Street between M Street Pennsylvania Avenue beth,een M Street and wastr¡ngton Circle ------Reroute DCT buses to I (Ey") Pennsylvania Avenue 23rd and 22nd Streets Virginia 39 ---:----Key Bridge and Vlisconsin Avenue ------- bet$reen VJisconsin Avenue and Pennsylvania Avenue Street from be tureen ---'-- P Street and 38 Ave.- 39 4l 44 '- \6 �Page State Department area bus priorities: C Street, lSth Street, lgth Street, E Street, Const i tut ion Avenue 50 Transit service renþved 5l Bus shelters (State :------from Const¡tution Avenue ---- Department area) Permit parking (State Department area) 53 Taxi stands Massachusetts Avenue betlveen l.lisconsin Avenue and Sheridan Ci rcle Transît use of Rock Creek Parkway P Street between 22nd Street and 20th Street ---- ---- P Street bus street 58 Connecticut Avenue between Calvert Street Dupont 58 Circle ------- and of Connecticut Avenue lSth Street north of Massachusetts Avenue --------------lSth Street south of Massachusetts Avenue -----20th Street, 2lst Street, between P Street and Columbia Road north 62 63 K St reet of 20th Street ---lgth Street south of Dupont Circle ---- K Street west -------+:------------------------ Connecticut Avenue between Dupont Circle and K Street Street ì3th Street north of K Street l4th Street north of K Street llth Street north of K Street l2th Street north of K Street lOth Street north of K Street l6th Street north of H ttl --------------------------*------- 64 65 66 68 69 69 7O �Page Sherman Avenue ---------- 7l 9th Street north of K Street 7th Street north of Mt. Vernon Place -i------New Jersey Avenue Rhode north of Massachusetts Avenue ----- 7l lsland Avenue east of 9th Street North Capitol Street NewYorkAvenueeastofNorthCapîtolstreet.-----.--.-.73 York Avenue ''-i.i-ii'J'i l- betureen North Capitol Street and :---- New --:----" 74 c street, D Street NE east of Massachusetts Avenue --'-'- 75 -'75 East Capitol Street between lst Street and llth Street 4th street, 5th Street south of New Yor.k Avenu€ 2nd Street between Pennsylvania Avenue SE and Constitution Avenue --:------ ---'-'-- 76 lst Street between Union Station Plaza and Pennsylvania Avenue ---'---- 76 Street'-" 78 Union Station E Street between North Capitol Street and 3rd Street between lst Street and 3rd Street Nl.I Constitutlon Avenue between lst Street and D 78 ¡ô Pennsylvania Avenue '--Street east of l''lassachusetts Avenue -----pennsylvania Avenue sE between lAth Street and lst street H -----3rd,4th,6th,7th Streets below E Street Stl ------------ M Street between 8th Street SE and Delav'rare Avenue aar Douglas Brìdge/South Capìtol Street -------------J------- Anacostia I (llttr Street) Bridge (Eye) Street, Virginia Avenue SE iv - 79 80 81 82 82 �Page l4th Street l'95 between Pennsylvania Avenue and Bridges Summary of Model Twors bus streets I Street between 20th Street and l3th H Street between lBth Street and lllth K Street between 20th Street and l4th Street 86 Street 87 Street 88 l3th Street 89 between K Street and Pennsylvania Avenue ---- 9l Pennsylvania Avenue betv'/een lBth Street and G 84 l4th St reet - Street east of l5th Street g2 93 F Street between lltth Street and 5th Street ----.-------- 93 l2th Street 93 SIJ Mall between I Street and Pennsylvania Avenue ---- Bus Termînal area lndependence Avenue between 9tl l4th Street and lst Street -- 7th Street south of lndependence Avenue St reet between I ndependence Avenue Pennsylvania Avenue 7th 96 and 96 Massachusetts Avenue H Street and 7th Street New York Avenue 94 97 west of 7th Street 9th Street between K Street and Pennsylvania ----- 97 lOth Street between K Street and Pennsylvania Avenue ---- 98 E Street between l3th Street and Avenue 4th Street 98 ---- 98 llth Street between Pennsylvania Avenue and K Street ---- gg Constitution Avenue between 6tfr Street and l4th Street -- gg Pennsylvanla Avenue between l5th Street and 4th Street - IOO l3th Street between Penñsylvania Avenue and K Street Major advantages of Model Two 100 �Hours of operation - truck service ------ - taxi service ---------------!--0ff-s,treet parking -------------- Hours of,Operation Ì. Streets losing transit service in Model Two Charter bus, intercity bus, airport bus S\^l Mal I area - Model Ttlo 7th Street sout lndependence Avenue lndependence Avenue r¡/est bus terminal - Model - of 7th Street - C St reet Sl./ between l4th S t reet and --------Model Two Sl,J ---------------- I 2th Model Two, --Model Two St ----- reet .r08 t0g Two of 7th Street l2th Street Expressway - Model Two 4tfr Street ' Model Two -lndependence Avenue east Model Two ----- t0g --:--------- lt0 ----:!------- il0 llt ilt D Street - Model Two ll2 F Street east of 7th Street - Model Two ll2 New York Avenue - Model Two 7th Street north of Pennsylvania Avenue - Model Two ---- ll2 Pennsylva.nia Avenue east of 7th Street - Model Two '----- il3 of l4th Street - Model Two ----l2th Street north of Constïtution Avenue - Model Two --- il4 il5 ------:-K Street busway K Street east H Street bus street r 16 -----:--- l4th Stl'eet bus street n7 il9 F Street bus street i, llth Street bus street 120 - vt �i' P.age 7th Street bus street l2l Pennsylvania Avenue bus street 122 SECTI0N I I I : CONCLUSIONS 125 APPEND I X Figure l: igu F re 2: Rerouting of Route DCT l3r 38 Rush hour bus lanes for M Street between Key Brîdge and V/isconsin Avenue 132 Figure J: Suggested rerouting of DCT Routes 30-38, l./estbound on M St reet between 3l st Street and l,/isconsin Avenue Figure 4: Bus I anes for M St reet between trti scons i n Avenue and Pennsylvania Avenue, and Pennsylvania Avenue between M Street and 25th St reet r34 Rerouting of transit bus routes in the V/ashington Circle Area (¡,todel Two onìy) t35 Figure 5: Figure 6: Figure 7: Model Two: Bus Department area priority system for the State t36 Model Two: P Street rush hour bus street; bus lanes , 2lst Street, 20 th St reet , I 8th St reet , Connect i cut Avenue Figure 8: Model Two: K Street busway; H Street street; l4th Street bus street Figure F !: Fi gure Figure CBD bus segments segments - Model r38 Suggested center sample routes Model Two city routes for t4t One l2: Major auto routes - street segments transit service (¡to¿el Two) Table l: bus Model Two: l4th Street bus street; F Street bus street; Pennsylvania Avenue bus street; ;----- t39 7th Street bus street !---- priority lt: CBD bus priority igu re l0: t37 ------ 142 wi thout 143 selected t44 vtt �viii �BUS PRIoRITY STRAIEGIðS FOR ÐOWNTOWN 'vtASifI.\GTcN fntroductlon At the present, tine the urban transportatlon plcture 1n the Nationts capltal is a tantallzLng rnixt,ure oi hope and despalr., on the front cf opt.tmlsn is the antictpated äpening of the flrst, ?!age of the )4etro rail raptd transit sysuèm sometlme in L974. the uncertaínty surroundlng t.he exact date of lnitial operat,lcn reflects t,he bloct(age of ccnsLruction funds engendered by t,he seenlngry endlesã freeway debate. Dependlng on your perspectlve, i"¡ashtngton wltl either beneflt, fron or suffer because of the ccnstfuct,lon cr abandonment of planned freeways. rn the reaLm of bus t,ransport,ation, I'Icrthern virglnla is t,he hone cf the famous shirley Tighway busway. Thls ãxcluslve bus rane has wltnessed an 3c-1 incieasã in exàress operatrcn pat'rcnage over the. last twenty ncnths. fn aclCitlon, thlrty ner¡¡ air conditloned buses have recently been put tnt,p åervlce by the i'lcrthern vlrginla lransport.aticn ccnmlssicn. r !{cwever, discouraglng bus trends are arso clearly tn evldence. Locål t'ranstt co,npan{es have been forcecl t.c rãi.se fares several tines over the peri"oci of the last few years. Patrcnage cn Ìnany routes has drcpced, and especlally low patrcn ccrlnts há,¿e been noted on nlghttime runs. rn a series of recent newsgaper artlcles, the ,cwner of D.c. Translt has been hint,lng his- cämpany nright. be forced by rislng costs to seek a ftfty ceñt fare.2' fn many respects the sltu,rt-lcn ln,^lashlngtcn slmLlarltt cs to evrlnts ln other 'naJor urban aieas.l:ears nurnerous Long ter:n anrl plans for lnproved pubrtc hranslt, are bar.nceã by þopes harsher reallttes for the near future. fn the.ttrattonrs Caþltal, as tn rncst ct,her urban areas, tle prtvate aut,cno¡-iie ls by-iar-' the most. domlnent, mode of traver. rn the short,rrñ tt, apþear" trrl: advantage ll rircel-y t,c increase. Thererore, -fr," travertng publlc cculd well rnake use of strategles which.are sultable ioí lmplement,atíon ln the near future aná thus, offei qùi"r"r, if not exotic, remedlês. Rarl rapi.d t,ranslt, systäns, pecple movers, and ln scne cases new freernrays, ="pËi=tlcated t'o be adequat'e long ter:n strateqies. t{cwevèr, "uv welr prove thè most, lnnedlate forn of t,ranslt fnprove,'rnent ln igashingÈon can be fcund in the realm of bus servlee. Dr. ìlobert. A. :lennes, ui"lTA. s Asslstant, Adntnlst,rator Prcgran Demonstraticns, recently agreed with thls line of for reasontng tn a speech delivered to t,he Arnerican Soeiety of Civff Engin""r". Ðr. ifenmes sald he felt cltles would have to-depenã on buses for �a long tlme to come. Hê polnt,ed out that, conventlonal ral'l systems take ntne to twelve years to develop, and lnnovattonal systems even longer. Thls paper t,hus, takes t'he posltlon thaÈ the most lmmedlate solutlons to lnlashingtonr s urban t,ransportatlon dlfftculttes are st,rategles of lmprovernent t,o the local bus systern. Indead, even wtth the completlon of t,he varlous stages of Metro, buses will renaln an f.nþortant mode of transportatlon. fhls author belleves thaL buses wlll nct only functton as vLt,al feeders to Metro. In addltLon, nanl¡ rcutes w111 have t,o ent,er the downtcwn area if the convônlenèe of t,ranslt oatrons ls Èo be maxlmlzed. fherefore, lnprovenent,s underta,ken ln the realm cf bus servlce nort, can renaln |n effect durlng t,he lmplementat,lon of operations on the varlous st,ages of Metro. A promlslng range of solut'lons ls presented by bus prlorlty st,rat,egf.es. Such strategles encompass a broad and grcwlng range of concept,s. IncLuded ares separate rlght-of-!üay busways, excluslve bus freeway lanes, bus lanes on brldge or tunnel apgroaches, bus lanes on brldges, express bus lanes on arterlal streets (curb lane, cent,er lane, or u¡rong way lane), bus lanes on downtown street,s (rush hour, buslness hcur, or full ttnre), exclusive downtown bus st,reets, slgnallng preferences for buses (includtng bus slgnal, actlvatlon), Èurn preferences for buses, and against the flow of traffic operatlon on orê-wâY st,reet,s. åI1 of these strategles are subject t,c varfations ln thelr hcurs of operatf,on, rush hour use being by far the mcst co'n:non t,actlc to date. Varlat,lons are alsc possible 1n the degree of bus excluslveness. SharlnE modes cf t,ransportatf.on rnay lnclude t,axls, airport, llnoslnes, and carpools. A number cf t,he opt,lons llsted are relatlvely expenslve soluttons. Plans such as t,he Shtrley Hlghway 3us!,¡ay are cf thls type and are sulted to t,he fast, movement of bus connuters from suburban areas to centraL buslness dlstricts. In effect bussrays solve problems lnvolving relatlvely long dlstancê I'corrÍder'¡ ¡novement,s by bus. This study fccuses on bus prlorlty strategles whlch could be used cn downtown streets ln the Dlst.rlct of Colunbla. It, çxanlnes prLortty concept,s for buses once they have left hlgh speed factllÈles such as the Shlr'ley Busway and ent,ered clty streets, A recent 'artlcle ln the l^tashlngton Post polnts out, the utlllty of t,hls approach. A repoiter cheèfea Shlrley rfighway servlce shortly after express lanes for buses contlnued across the new segment, of the 14th Street, Brldge di.rectLy tnto Íashlngton. It was discovered that busway t,rlps from Serlnary Road to t,he Bureau of Sngraving t,ock Just t,en nlnutes. Thts was a conslderable advantage over prlvate cars coverlng t,he same dlst,ance on the eror.¡ded highway. !{owever, t,he next, five blocks of the Journey on 14th ,ãt,reet (tc Pennsylvanla .qvenuê) took nine mtnutee and thlrt,een more mLnutes vrere needed to reach Farragut, Square.3 l i .i l �Smlth - 3 therefore, excellent runnlng ttmes on the Shlrley Busway srere counte¡ed wlth very slcw runnlng t,tmes on a small sectton of down- ctt,y streets. Local authorltles brere qulck t,o recognlze thls problem. As a result of the 14th Street Corrldor Study, bus and rlght turn only lanes srere est,abllshed along I4Lh Street. Thls system uses curb lanes, north and south, during rush hours and stretches along lower l4th St t,o Constltutlon and Pennsylvania Avenues. fnltlally t,he t4th St, lanes encountered lacf cf cooperatlon from auto drlvers and enforceinent problerns became evlãent. The Dlstrlct lffghway Departrnent responded to t,hls challenge by palntlng large yellow lane marklngs. A recent, fteld chect< bythls author showed the newly' emphaslzed lanes operaÈing wlth some success but a number of auto vf.olatl0ns brere noted. - The Dlstrlct has also experlrnent,ed wlth bus and rlght, turn only rush hour lanes on H st, r st, 16th st, and recently, 7th st. Result,s of these experinrent,s have úeen mlxeå. one of thä: reasons for t,hls lack cf over'¡¡hernlng success, iÞ t,he opinlon of thls author, ls Èhat t,he experl:nental segments are not part of a larger and interccnnected systern. rn aclditlon, alL present sect'lons nust share thetr routes wlth large voiunes óf sometimes oori-cooperattve autcnotlve Èrafflc. .ToÌA¡ever, 1t is lnrport,ant, t'o ncte that, the flstrict has been wt1L1ng to excertmeñt with the lanes aLready in effect. thus, a prcaressLve att,itude has been establlshed. thls authcr t.hereiore feels that downt,own l^lashington can well be t,he btrt,hplace f,or a tcÈal syst,em of bus streets and bus lanes. t,own The second bus prtorlt,y mcdel presented tn thls report, rnai<es use of bus onry streets as well as Èus onry ranes. Thl; nodel reltes on subst,antlal anount,s of rninor bus rercutlng t,o achleve sufflcfent bus volunes over lndiviclual system seg*.áts. The first model ls of a limtted nature and only ¡nakei use of bus lanes. The deslgn of t,he :ncdels was governed by nine :naJor goals ? l. 2'. 3a To lnerease the people carrylng capaclty of downtown Dlstri ct st,reets To pronot,e a hlgher level of translt service in t,er;ns of frequency and speed To provtrde new advant,ages for bus travel which wlll help att,ract, a_sLgnlftcantly hlgher nurnber of patrons to Èhts rnode of t,ransportatton; to lmprove t,he'coinpetitlve pcsit,ton of tranètt bus servt"" in relatlon tir the prlvat,e 4a 5 aut,ornoblle To provide t,he dcwntov¡n -omrnerclal areas wlth a level of publlc t,ransportaticn sufficient t,c prornote substantlal econonic vlt,allty To provlde the dcwnt,own con:nerclal area wlth a :tìore gompglitive posLtion in relatlon to suburban shopplng factIl tÍ es �the nu:nber of of,f-sttel! Plr[tng spaces whlch ñust be 'rcarved outÍ of the tl¡nlted amount of üãfùi¡fã tana avallable ln downtown Washlngton by 7. fo-neip ctrrb unhealthy nollut,lon levels causeddownorr"ri|=high-"ði"nes oi þrlvate autonobl'les on town êftY street,s 8. To ""fãrät," mutually annoylng movements of dlfferlng types- cf vehtcle modes 9. To- establlsh a number of convenlent ührough routes for automobtles which would not have any local translt 6. To mlnlmlze . movements The îhls report wlll be dlvlded lnto three rnaJor sectlons.nine dlscussl,on of the r"porirã-ffrèt, secÈlcn w111 begln wlth a aforementloned goals. Ir¡ addltlon, thls tnltlal sectLon v¡l11 concontain a dlscuésion of the varlouà factors whtch nust besectlon The flrst' ln planning bus lanes or bus streets. the "iã"iãa rrrr alsc dèal wlth a descrlptlon cfbrlef varlcus klnds of bus dl.scusslon of the piiãrity scr,"ã"sl ¡nciuAåa i.tf f f be ãtrategies used in varlous cltles. Plans whlch have been Aeveloóed for thã iVashington area wlll be correred ln partlcular detai.I. The second sectlcn of t,he repcrt -w!ll descrlbe two bus prfcri[y moãef s developed for use cn dcwntown ,vashlngton streets. tfre tfrËt model uses, to a great extent, present bus roubings. fne Uus volunes genei:ated bt current bus schedules dc not Justlfy anythlng more çhán an expanäed series of bus and rl'ght turn addltigt, oniy laåes fn Ëftã cà¡trai area of the Distrlct. Int'o speed up be able sone $trcng-ttay or Cf,oSS-oVer'bus lanes.may express sérvièe Uo outlylng areas. The second model is a nore coirplete systenn of bus þriorlty strategiles. It uses extenslve bus- reroutLng (ln terms of the nurnber of routes altered) tenpered ¡V o"ty s¡nali ioute dlsplacements (routes are only. ncved by one oi twc-blocks. at t,he mäst) to achieve nore ext,ensLve bus volu:nes on certaln key dcwntown streets. These streets {portlons of iI 3È, I4th 9t, Lowe-i pennsylvanla Ave,_ and F 9t) can then be transfornecl certaln into an tnterconnectãd systen oi bus only streets during cn to avold undue hardshlps cruclal travel hours. In order lose- all vltal aulomoblle journeys, a nu:rnber cf streegsexample ofof their thls îhe eentral Local translt serúice and-stops. wouLd lose all transtt bus strategy ts Constitutton eve whlch . servlcé. the rnethodology used to shape the models was. heavlly lnfluenced by ttre iãct t,hat, thls was a one student-project. In additlonr-the aut,hcr !.s not, an experienced Èrafflc eng'ineer. inus, systenratl,c lnEen¡lews of local -offlclals, nerchants and autonobtle drtvers were not atterrnpted foq reascns of tlme and not' were sanlty. In addltion, sophlstlcated trafflc flow ¡noCels v¡ere. SOrne efforts, however, used ät tf*s stage cf research. direct,ed at estlñating vehicle dlsplacenents (the a'lto carrying t'ranslt capacttles of those street,s wlthcut any or very lict'Ie priortty for buses uslng the Uuã servlce) and new travel tlmes �routes. thls sÈufy dld focus on an ln-depth study of present bus routes and volutnes.__Bus volumes were also esltmatãd, uslng the present, dat,a, for arl"bus prtorlty streets. An on-sLreet and off-st,reet parklng survey lras conducted. rn addlt,lon, the aut,þcr surveyed the unlque condtttons of alt street segment,s utlltzed tn Lhe bus prtórtty sysÈein. leràiieã maps srere prepared uslng theEe oD-siÈe lnspect,ions. "ãirrng The last, section of t,he report, ccnststs of an .A,ppendlx. Det,aLled on-sit,e maps and tables covertng present, anä- propcåea bus volumes for all-key do$¡ntown street, ã"ä*"ni"-""n be found tn thts concluding segment. rt ls linpcrtant, to clearly reccgntze that.: r) short term lrnprovenents in "rashlngt,onr s uiban tiansportatlon-åvãiãã-"iii"' have to be targely confinec r,c rranslt bùs op"iutrãi"; zl ã"ã" wlth the operat,lcn of t,he firsr, st,ages-of tr¡ã ¡qàtiã -ãv"Iå*,';;" operat,lons wilr contf nue t,o servlce a rarge port,lcn oË the'aown_ town areats trans_oortatlon needs. -',{lth tñesä ,p*i"f""tives tn focus, thg report now turns t,o an exãminatton õr büs prlority theory and practlce. 2. 3 I'shirley Busway get,s 30 ir'ew Buses,, rRT 2!ggå!, Jury-.iugusÈ 1971, pp. 22-23. Elsen, Jack "chalk stuclles 3id for l{lgher Fares'r '.tashlnqlcn _Pgg!, lugust, L7, 1971. jlsen, Jack ":.,><Ðress Bus speeds i.¡ay to old slowdcwn'¡ ',.lashinston poåt, ,{prlf 6; IgZl_. ' �Prlorltv Theonr a nd Practlce At flrst glance lt may appear strange that ln an era of rlslng Cransport.atton demands many urban bus Èranslt systens are fácÍng a drcp ln patronage wtth a correspondlngly bleak flnancial plctube. Thls |s especlally perplexlng when one conslders the ever increasing numbcr of Lraffle Jarns tr!<|ng the drlvers of,',prlvate automobtles. The bus, however, has faced a suþfalnêd proble:n: lt gets caught !n the Eame Jams as the ear.¿ Thus, under present, condltlons, travel tlmes for buses are alinost automatlcally doomed to be consl<lerably hlgher than that of t,he car from any one point to another. A recent Federal Hlghway Adnlnistratlon study, len*llvftv sl of th e Svaluatlon of a 3us Transit Svsten ln a Select'ed ô: ,Po lntñFEñã crucial lnpo;Eãffiñã-E"åãEõr. s' i; u0v Ithlrteen sensltlvtty test,s of te chntcal , economlc, n and pollcy changes r{ere made for a modeled cl ty ( BalÈ1r¡rore ). These t,ests pot nted out, some lnterestl ng conc 1u stons as related to nany plans c'ur rently suggested for helptng bus systems. Parklng rates 1n the ¡nodel were doubled for the enilre downt,own areaa Surprlsirigly transiÈ ?atrcnage rcse only 6%. Thls ls not pronlslng for backers of high cent,ral area parklng rates or auto taxes. 3ensittvlty tests $¡ere alsc run cn differing fare olans, Fares hrere lolcered I0 cents and bus patrcnage showed only a proJected 5,252t lncreasei a fLat, 25 cent, fare, regardless of how nany zones traveled, resulted in an lncrease of only 6.96'3. In both cases t,he t,ranèit systen r.¡culC þave lost noney by putting the reduced fare'plans int,c effect.2 Thus, two ofteñ õffereA solutlons are sholvn, by thts mcdel at, least, to be :ncstly cptlnlstic and SectLon Ir s i not, overly pragrnat,lc. The sensltivtty tests, hcwever, did fccus on one fact,or rvlrlch could substantlally boost bus ridershlp: a signtflcant, lncrease in bus t,ravel speed. Xncreases of 5O'l tn transit llne haul soeeds resulted ln an increase of 4C'l" ln ï¡us patrcnage. Travel tlme decreases by bus acecunted for the larger use tn patronage by urban travelers when related to nionet,ary costs. 3 In addlt,ton, lmprovenents ln the distribut,lon systen of the CBD lncreased patronage on buses by stgniflcant arnounts z 442t, - 52?(. fhe inpLlcatlons resultlng fron t,hls studyrs eoncluslons are clear. Iq buses are to attract a large number of oatrons avray f rom cars: f . bus average speeds wlll have to be great,ly Lncreased IX. bus dfstrlbutlon cf passengers ln the dcwntown area wtll have to .be excellent. ?then viewed t,hrough the looklng glass cf cornmon sense, these concluslons show great, validity for urban .qnerl.ea. I'le are an affluent society and relatively small decreases ln bus f,ares are not apt, to greatly Lnfluence auto drlvers. They can al.ready afford the convenl,ence of driving thelr cars. (:{lt,h respecÈ to studtes v¡hlch show t,he hlgh cost, of drlving, drfvers at, least thtnk they can afford t,helr connutl.ng hablts. ) thus drLvers acparently tracle costs of drlvlng for tlme- savlng:s whtch ultlmat,ely translat,e lnt,o percelved hlgh levels of convenf ence. rf the bus ls t,o successfully at,t,ãck {, �Smlth - 7 the realnrs of tl,me savlng and convenlence. Thls llne of reasonlng leads dtrectly to the concept,s of the buswâyr the bus lane, and the bus stréet,. Uslng bus prlorlty schemes the runnlng tines of buses can be substanttally êut, In fact, advantages ln travel tt:ire for the bus over the car, caught tâ tf¡e sa:né old t,raffl.c Jarns, are posslble. The Shtiley success story shows that large rLses Ln patronage are posslbte gl.ven drastlc drops in bus travel tlmes,. ft also leads to the concluslon t,hat expenslve new facllltteg for hlgh s_oee'C rush hcur novenent, of cars can cnlv hurt, t,ransi.t. Sgeeding uþcarrnovementswhi1e11kerv1se1nvesffians-cort,atiõn pronises tc nal<e the ccncept of balanced transpcrtatlon rrthe lmposslble dream. il fhe concreÈlzatlon of i.{ashíngton, thus cannoÈ be Justifled under the banner of balanced t,ransportat,lon. GoaI 1 lLsted 1n the lntroductlon concerned Èhe lncrease of, the people carrying capaclty of the streets cf downtown WashLngton. Thls goal recogntzes that the typlcal car ln ¡¡rerlca has âo av€f,age ca-oaelty of frcra four to six persons. on Èhe cther hand, the average t,ranslt, i¡us can handle flfty patrons and more Using vari.ous lcad factors for both cars and buses, lt posslble tc ccnsLruct nodels of t,he.people carrying ea-oaclty ls of clty streets. The Èable on the followtng gage shows the load per hcur per lane eacaclty cf varlcus rodes of transportation. The tabLe r,ras ccnptled by the Instttute of lrafflc ErgLneers. i.;lth load factors cf between I.25 and 2.CO perscn.s cer car and at flcw rates of 6C0-300 cars per lane per hour, vre can see Èhat a clty st,reet lane can acconmodate, vla the autonoblle, between 750 and 1600 geople ,oer hcur. Ð<tenslve carpoollng, lf encouraged by sorne klnd of publlc pollcy cculd easlly ralse these ftgures over the 2OOA level. 3'or purposes of est,abllshlng a target flgure fcr buses tc shoot at t,hls aut,hcr shall be generous to t,he car. A load fact,cr of I.75 cecgle ger car wlli be deslgnated. and a flow factcr of 900 cars per hour wtll be ¿Issu;ned. Under these ccndltlcns the auto¡oblle can earry 1400 perscns per lane per hour. Transtt buses usl.ng a bus prlorlty lane can eastly top thls auto based capaclty,.. turntng to t,he table we ftnd that, 50 seat, buses operatlrig on a slxt,y second headway, wlth a 73./" Ioad factor, can carry 2250 oecple oer lane per hour. Short,er headways and a 100.r, cr more load factor drast,lcally tnerease these bus lane carrylng capacltles. The tabre shows us roo% capaclty at. thtrty second headways glves a lane per hour bus capaclty cf 60C0 The per car average load factcr would have torlse slgntftcantly tc aporoach even the lowest, bus capacltlz clted. îoi ,exanp1e, a load factor of 2.75 oeople per car, whlch could only be achieved by extenslve ear_ pogllng would sç1ll only carry, at 800 cars per hour, a tot,ar of 22oo pecple per lané per hour.. the car f.È ¡nust do so 1n �tgt l-â PASSENGER CAPACITIËS PER LANE OR TRACK IN ONE DIRECIION EFFECT¡VE tê, vEHrctEs tã TANE OR TRACK ¡ ûr{ ots ìJts cf ::' oc ãT If OR IRAINS VEHICIE PRIVATE AUTOMOBILE FACILITY Cily Street, Design FIow Rote Cily Street, CopocitY Freewoy, Design Flow Rote Freewoy, CoPocitY PE R PER PER HOUR HEADWAY (min ó00 800 r,500 2,000 0.1 0.r3 0.04 0.03 \o O\Ë \O= sÈ (50 seots) UÞ e llì oNc _¡ .j o City Street City Street City Street or Freewoy Freewoy Freewoy (t¡ lo HF t.50 1.?5 75O r,000 1,875 z,soo 75./o TRANSIT BUS BUS RAPID TRANS¡T (Monuol operot¡on) I¡ AUTOMATED BUS TRA¡N RAIL RAP¡D ó0 90 ì 20(o) ì go(s) 240þt r.00 o.67 0.50 o.33 o.25 1,200(b) Buswoy,SO-seot buses l0<or troin, So-seot bus 9OO 1,200 2,250 3,000 t.75 2.00 1.050 1,400 2,265 3,500 '1,200 0.50 0.25 0.05 20 3.00 40 r.50 120 240 I O0o/o 2,2s0 3,000 3,375 4.s00 ¿,soo ó,000 oi,zso t e,ooo ç,ooo 2,000 4.500 ó,000 9,000 l2,0oo 45;ooo óo,ooo 7,500 10.000 20,000 t 5.000 TRANS¡T TRA¡N lO-cor troin ì,ó00 3,000 4.000 125% 3,7sO 5,625 7,500 I ì ,250 15,000 7,500 15,000 75,ooo ì 2,500 25,000 EFFECTIVE PASSENGER CAPACITY PASSENGERS PER CAR ó<or lroin IE PASSÊNGERS VEH¡CTE 20 30 40 3.00 2.00 20 3.00 2.00 30 40 r.50 r.50 roo l2,o0o ¡20 t4,400 Af l5O% {.900 6,750 9'900 l!,!oo 18,000 9,000 l8.ooo 9o,ooo 15.009 30,000 VAR¡OUS ¡50 18,000 180 2¡,ó00 27,ooo 32,/,oo lõ,ooo 2t;óoo 3ó,000 43,200 24,OOO 28,800 2o,ooo 24pOO 30,000 30,000 3ó,000 45,000 4O;OOO 48,ooo óo,o0o tË H ¡ t! É o Þ 5 E'FECTIVE PASSENGER CAPACITY FOR VAR¡OUS TOADII.¡G RAT¡OS oÛr) Þ':i bF c|. Hit C¡pac¡tv AT VAR¡OUS 3ó'000 54,000 Ê Þ Ê (+ o þ 5 o tt É o o o 5 GI o ll É P á E o C: Itr o Þ C| l.¡ û o 72,OAO number of lity of uro, v, ã t¡ (+ 8ur froin) !f I @ �Smlth - 9 Faced wlth thls llne of reasonlng, backers of t,he automoblle rnay offer an argunent whl,ch, on the surface, appears t,o have a great deal cf valldlty. Where, t,hey ask, wlll you flnd buses running on even a one ml.nute headway wlth a 75:L load factor. the present answer ts, only durlng rush hours. However, thls oaper ts talklng about, ln nodern t,ernlnolcgy, rra whole new ball g.ame.rr T::e syst,em belng proposed cont,alns bus lanes and streets offerlng hlgher travel speeds and convenlence t,o t,ranslt patrons. rn the second sectlon cf Èhls paper the reader wIIl flnd the baslc bus syst,em ls reconst,ructed so that headways of thlrty seconds and less are common durlng 'rush hours and ¡ntnute headways can be found durlng buslness hóurs on cerÈaln st,reets. wl,th thls Èype of projected system tþe capacity arguments do galn a great deal of valldity, . Auto advocaÈes may also malntaln that the auÈhor ls *-unfalr, measuring potential capactty of buses versus t,he .belng actual number of people oer car. Slnee a car can carry four tc slx pecple, t,hey mfght rnàÍntaln we should use these ftlures t,o deterrnine auto lane capacltles. ilcwever, there ls a good objectl.on to uslng thls nethodologlcal apprcach; the cverwhelnlng fact,or not.ivating car useage appears to'be convenlence. ft is slmply not, very convenlent t,c drlve ycur car around t,o plck up four t,o slx,people before beglnntng on your work Journey. Thts acccunts fcr.the less t,han unlversar ãccept,ance-of cai pocling. Rush hour buses do have a hlgh probaLtllty of runnlng at seating capacity load factcrs. ro turn, rush hour auto Journeys have a hlgh probablt.tty of carrytnE onry one or twc passengers per vehicle. Thus, t,he aut,hor Judges t,he capaclty cocnpariscns used tc be Just and logical. îhls belng the case, !.re can begin to determtne how rrìany buses are needed on a given street to replace a glven number of cars, the gcal being more street canaclty via use of the bus. "{t 8oo cars per iane per hour witr¡ a i.75 load level ere have seen a street lane can carry o:nlf 1400 peopre per hour. A sixty second bus headway with a 1S¡r" fòaa factor'easily extends thls capaclty by over 300 people or 57"/,. From t,hls ÞersÞective slxt,y buses an hour per rane èasl1y Justtfles a prtoilty schene for that lane. For bus streets the requlred bus volune would rlse acccrdf ng t,o the equtvalent auto capaclty. The aut,o capacity of four lanes subject to the fact,ors already ment,ioned ts 5600 people; for slx lanes Èhe ftgure rlses to aZoo aut,o patrons. Thus bus only streets wilr have to have capacity Ln exgess of these numbers and headvrays of thirty seconds anã less wl1l be needed. lrralter g. Rainvllle produced a set of calculatlons based on flgures slmilar Eo those shown tn the t,able used in this report, :{e concluded hls calculattons by saylng: rt, mlght be said t,hat under these entlrely attafnable condlttons, one lane of peak transtt buses can handle as many persons per hour as can be rnoved four lanes of aut,cmoblles. Il,is suggests by three t,o a-rane efflclency of 3 or 4 t,o l in favor c¡f t'he tranãtt bus.4 �gmlth - 10 uslng only capaclty arguments can turn lnto a numberr s garne ãi-t,ft" ',mi mcâe caã Ueát- youT nodel varlety. In addf'tLon' i,ñf-ã ãutr,or feêts sone less thån deslrable concluslons can be dráwn frorn âo ovêt-rellance on capaclty figur96. io-r lnstance, bus prlorlty sche:r¡es because of t,helr capacltles might be used becaüse of är to stimulate very hlgh densl,Èy CBD development. author l"lany other iftiJ certai.nly ls not, the lnteñt of thebus prlorlty strategles' iávãra¡fe aspêcts acrue to the varlous Goals two and t,hree, mentloned ln the lntrcductlon, refe5 to the promotl.on of bettêr bus servlce and consequently heaLthler bus syslems. î.,tlth bus prlorlty schemes an attemct 1s betng_made to, biuntly, get cars and truct<s out of the way cf _transtt buses. Suêceedfng in thls strategy means that hlgher bus-frequencles wlll be póssible on streets havlng bus priorlty plans. Iñ oPeratlng. speeds are addltionl signtficantly higher Cowntowntranslate into more sought.. The two branches of thls goal convenlent servlce for bus patrons. New bus advant,ages are, thus, contenplated by t'hls strateglc and t,herefore, ll.ne, centerlng on tów trav-el tlmeg, hlgh frequency,the affecconvänlence. ihe bus has been ftghtlng the car for t,ions of passengers at, a large dl,sadvantage. Walting at the bus stop èan, at times, b€ a long anC unpleasant experi'erice. Once on the Èus, you dô not have the benefits cf prlvacy and the bus car radlo. îhen there ls the parade of tlme consumlngtransfers. and stop" and- the problems of less- than dlrect routes !'or'sorne patroirs walks to and from the bus stop can be substantlal. The l¡us cþerates under thesê handtcaps and when lt reaches an auto clogged traffle Jarn lt fares no better than lts Prlme competlng incde, the car, 3us priority schenes propose to change the odds !n thls rhorse raêe,, b1z èhanging t,rack conditlons. 3y givlng buses prlorlttes tfre! will be able t,o speed around or through auto Lottlenecks. thusr. the bus wlll have a nevt advantage whfch wlll enhance Lts lmage vis-a-vls t,he car. A central fact,or favoring t,he car, travel tirne, wttt have moved ln the dlrectlon of the bus. Ih addtÈion, if certatn key downtown sereets are transformed lnto bus streets, the scale cf convenlence wiII svring furthei t,o Èhe bus. It'ls hoped and loglcally anticlpated that thls pollcy of new bus advantages will produce substantlal nunbers of- new Ëus patrons. If thls ls true, ?¡ashlngton and other clties'may be able to avold what presentl,y seem llÌ<e f.nevitagle tranãlt subsldies. thus, different pat'terns of urban sÈreet, use, rather than publlc tax dollars, may be t'he ultl¡nate method of returnlng health to translt servlces. Íhe Fourth and rlfth goals motlvating thls study are slrnilar Ln that, t,hey seel< to lrnprove economlc vltaLity ln ilashlngtonr s dorvntown area. ft should be recognlzed that vrlthout adequate publlc transportatlon the central area of,the DLstrlct can face- only contnerclal adverslty. Enough parklng a. J, �smLth - 11 places t,o ftIl the needs of_all peopre worklng and shopplng ln downtown D.c. cannoÈ, ln alr probablrlty, be found. eüên ir such a number of stalls for vehlcles could be carved out rgglon, what,_wourd remaln? Arnerlcans are famllfar enoughof the wlth the layout oi typlcal suburban shopplng centersi a comrierclal core surrounded by acres of dead, ugly concrete parklng areag. Cert,aln1y, this cannot, be a destied-endpolnt for- the déveiofñänt, of t,he core of our Nat,lon.s Capltal. . ol. polnt cannoÈ be avoided¡ :nanl¡ people, lncluding cent'ral Dlst,rlct merchants, f eel sornething-muit be done to make the area mcre cgmge!,ltlve i,¿tn outrylng sñopplng centers, the essence of t'he Flft,h Goal. Some seen to feãl t,he ane¡rerites provÍdJ.ng nore d,owntown parkftrg. This is an absurd st,rategy ln whlch can only fail. Relatlvely undeveloped areas of the õü¡urus have substanttal a.nounts of open land whtch can be devoted ¡"--- parkln9 areas. The central area of t,he Dist,rlct has a nonexlst,ent, amount' of undeveloped land. Thus, suburban regtons have a natural "oarklng: space' advantage over downtowñ washfngton. parkfng. spaces in the Dlstrlctr s core can only be deveÍopeá t{ew r) at t.he expense of extstlng land useé 2) of underground confLguratlons. Flowever, evenin varlous types if soaces are put underground their cLient, cars represent: addlt,lons .to street congestion. 'rhe sixth Goal of t.hls paper frowns on thls perspec'!:lve..and seeks to rnlnimize the nu¡nber of off street palklng spaces ,'squeezedt, fron the dcwnt,own area. Thus, Lhe mctt,o of i.tashingt,cnrs plannlng shourd be 'favcr s?ace_fo-a_people and human actlvltles, d,enounce the sacrlfice of valuable space for parktng areas.,, The suburbs have raped t,heir land with auto storage capaclty whlch they feer grveå tn** economi.c vlÈality; 1et, them,J_ive rvith. their mistake. The central core of _ilashffiniE¡ãTEããrage, a dense netv¡ork of bus 1Ínes which connect, t,he core with"t,he ent,lre met,ropolit,an area. 3us prtoritv strateales promf se to enhance thls advantage. - out,Iytn! comrnerclal areas are served uy rnucfr pocrer bus service anc they must rery alnost, ccmplet,ely on the car. 3y uslng bus lanes and streets downt,own.ilaäfrtngton wtll st,rengt,hen lts naturaL advant,age, bus servlce, over ãuburban Bhoptng ?re3g and thereby l:nprove 1ts compet,irive poslt,ton. Let the'rcult, of the auto" have thelr conciet,e subulban altårs¡ downtown 'Ì'¡ashi.ngton can have top notch bus servlce and space for human actl.vlty. 'rthen vlewed t,hrough nany perspecttves, 1t appears the private aut'o has reached lts pèak äs a transpcrtäLicn mode and lowr by necessity, will begln t,o lose ground. one of t,he ills luglslattvery attrlbut,ed tó the auto air laws pollut,ion. rn 1969, Hg.J clalmed thatby crean accounteclis air Lhe car for 39% of aLl air porlutants by welght. The forlowfng chart, conìpares relat,tve pollutants per passenger mlle foi cars and buses: �smtth :r Car Lead Organl c Coittpounds Carbon I'lonoxide Nltrogen oxides Sulfer oxides Partlculat,es 1 I I I I - L2 Bus -õL/Le L/2L4 5 2/L5 L/L5 2 &L/2 Bus prfolty strategles fcr dcwnÈown ;.tashtngton therefore promtse to at least ste¡n the rlse ln aut,o-caused alîpollutlon ánd hopefully, v¡Lll reverse adverse health t,rends by curblng auto uËe. eXi pollut.l,on ccntrol. was the t,heme of the Sevent,h goal llsted ln the lntroductlon. In su¡n:nary.we can see that desplte the scandalous lover affatr of urban area resldents for thelr cars, a number of st,rong trends are worklng agalnst an over reliance on thls mode of transportat,ion. Alr pollut,lon and excesslve urban space urasee via ¡rarklng facllltles are Jolned by t,he rlslng costs of buying anC ooeratlng vehlcles as negatlve constraints. irïow, whtle the auto graphlcally dlsplays lts shortccnlngs, ls the tlne to tmpLement, viable counter st,rat,egles. Bus priorlty optlons are probably t,he nost vlable concegt, t,o use ln thf.s era of emerging doubt concernlng aut,onotlve transportaÈlon. Flnally, t,he :ighth and. iíinth goals of thls repcrt, seek to naxinnlze the utlllty of the vartous t,ransportation nnodes servlng dorvntc',vn I'lashington. 3luntly stat,ed, cars, taxis, buses, and t,rucks flght a fierce bat,t,le cn urban streets. At, certaln ti:nes of the day, t.he various nodes sinply get, Ín cne anotherrs way and the concept of efftcient street use stands grossly vlolated. ffftcfent street, use recognlzes that a central clty street, has a number of, l:nportant, functtons. It can be carrylng concentrated groups of peonle on hcrne-tc work Journeys. It can cater to many ty?es cf ccinnerclal, recreat,ional, of social Journeys. îhe siteet acts as a channel for the fl,ow cf gocds to lÈs com_oonent Land uses. The street brings muçrlclpal services such as flre and pollce protectlcn t,o lÈs enveloped area. The street, ean also, though not, desirably, senre as a through rout,e for journeys neither ending or beglnnlng ln the cnetral busLness dlstrlct,. In addltlon t,c t,hese vehi.cle funct,ions, the street aLso sèrves þedestrlans and act,s as a set,ttng for many types of hunan actlvlty. Dr,¡rlng rúsh hours, the large number of people whleh must be conveyed by central area streets argues for the volurne movÍng, sgace savlng mode of transportatlon, the bus. ûrrlng rush hcurs, therefore, the regulatlcns governlng use of these street,s should cater t,o bus t,ravel via bus prlority p1ans. Provlsions must also be made so that the stieet syéte:n can, serve a llmtted nunber of auto trlcs whlch are not, sultable for conversion to the bus ncde. Rush ircur street, use should be a rnlxture of bus and auto travel with preference being glven to the bus. The frow of goods to dcv¡nt,own locatlcns ls cructal to t'he arear s health. äowever, durlng rush hours thts functlon can and should defer t,o pecple ncvtng functions. Slnply stated Ëhls lneans trucks shculd not be usLng dor,vntown sÈreets �Smlth - 13 during rush hours. At other times, the same streets can be the sl.te for turck dellveries. At non-peak hours, use of the clty streets by cars becornes .more viable. The number of geople wlshlng to use bus t,ransportatlon nay be relatively small and brtef bus heaCways not neeCed. Durlng these hours aut,o use cf rush hour bus prlori.Èy facllities Ls ratLonal. I{owever some streets of t,he CBD, due to t.helr ccrnnrercial nature or due t,o a hlgh nunber of bui routes, ¡nay carry hlgh bus vclumes durlng non-rush hours. These streets would be sulÈable for r¡ore extenslve, ttne wlse, bus prlority strat,egles. Any paÈron of t,he arears bus system ts all t,oo famillar wlth the various tort,ures t,hat car or Lrucl< confl,l,ct ean '1n..uce on hls Journey. the truck blocklng one and often twc lanes means an agonlzLng lose of time. The malI truck tylnqt up vJ.tal lanes at,8:30 a$ cr 5:I5 pln wlt,h its plck-ups, whèn tt could oerform these funct,lcns at,9:30 an and 7:00 ph, is an easy target, for bus catrons tc hate. The t,axÍ and car bl.oc,king the curb lane, and scnetimes cutting ln front, of the bus, to ptc¡< uì2 cr discharge a _c-assenger serve as provoÌ<ers of venon. 'rh€ car, trytng to pulr ln or out, of a pariing lot blocklng cne or two lanes 1s a synbol of sat,onÍc affillat,ion. rruthfulllz stated, t,oc Tany ciher vehtcles block t,he paths cf buses auling key hcurs and nake bus journeys longer and less cleasant. rf sLreets arÊ tc be usecl efflclently t,hese tnr:edlnents nrrst be rencved. fine lost due t,o mcdal lnterference :ïìeans money lôst t'c t,ranslt syst,ens. 'Ihe Cleveland Transit Systen has esllnated that' an lncrease of one:nile an hcur ln average bus c'ceratlng speed wourc save the systen $1 ntllion a year ln operäting costs.6 Lost patronagre ls probably even ¡irore cf an expenãe to t,he t'ransi.t sysiens, but inore dlfflcult, to measure becäuse of a lirxta.ocsitlon of causal fact,crs. There is a seccnd sLde to t,hls sÈory: the perspectlve of t,he auto driver. I-Ie can right,iully feel that, büs mðvenents have a !,endency to obstruct his journey. Ånyone who get,s caught, behind a bus plcktng up or dischaiglng þassengerã, or whó has experienced a bus cut,ting into hls Lane fro:in a cuiu 1ane bus stop is' av¡are of, the griefs bus movenents can Ðrovoke. rn additi.on, turning novements by buses at crowdeä lntersecttons can be najor inpedlments to trafflc flow. Thus, for those Journeys which'nust, be made by aut,os during rush:hours, t,hls report believes a aysten cf street,s not cairyÍng transit buses should be establ.Íshed. There should be two Lypãs of uautc onlyr street,s estabLished: off- street parklng lot fèed,er streets, and a nrinlrnun nunber of t,hrough rãute streets. FeeCer street.s such as r st, l.n dcv¡nt,own '.'Iashlngton, serve maJor clusters of extstfng off street oarklng factllties. faklng buses off these street,s reoresent,s an effort to rnaxlmfze the-ãó""ããi"nt use of exl.stlng off-street _oarking facllltles. The ot,her ùype or autc �Smith - L4 sereet caters to through trafflc ln the CgD. It ls cerealnly regret,able that, the central area mus¿ þe subJected to thts type of trafftc vrhl.ch burdens lts roads and does not contrlbute t'o lts econcnic developrnent. llcwever, at thls stage of urban development the cent,ral, ctty prcbably has to ltve wlth a certalñ anount cf thls type of trafflc. Therefore, lt would appeàr togical to conflne the t,rafflc to auto streets whlch do nct lnf:lnge upon the econonic anC human vttallty of other C3D streets, tJlowing through trafftc on all, CBD streets ls very inuch lÍke J.eaving your front door open because burglers have to make a 11vLng. . In designing bus prlorlty plans, a substantlal number of fáctors should be glven close ccnslderatton, It |s inportant, of actlvlty have ccnventent access lhat atJ. najor centerstransportatlon. Thl,s does Rot rnean by t.hat mcdes cf dorvntown -.ãff tþls access must, necessarlly corne from the same streets cr at t,he sane tlmes. It rneans that access shall, be avallable at appropriate times of t,he day from approprlate dlstance and time garameters. there are a nurnber of parameters whlch couLd be lngoE@dg distance could be 50C feet, or 1000 feet,, walklng ttmes fro.n transocration mode to actlvity site eould be t,hree mlnutes or slx mlnutes. Patrons of such actlvlty centers would thus have a cholce of aopropriat,e t,ransportatlon modes t,hough the sites of ihese incdes ln relatlon tc the centers would vary. In t,he second Èectlon t,he reader wlll flnd this gaper recomnends a systen whlch ccnsLsts of a bus street,, car street grld. lJsing t,hls strategy, etsD Þatrons v¡ould never be more than one or two blocks from bus servlce or auto streets. tr'dnlmunr interferenee between dtfferlng nodes of transport,at,lon mlght also be sought. This glves each mode t,he opportunlty to fulflll lts unlque functlons in an efflclent, and reasonable manner. The stcp and flow charact,erf.stlcs of the various modes tend to dlffer and t,he fulflllnnent of the stop and flow characterlstics for one mode can hamoer those of another. Fcr example, a bus needs to rnake a great deal cf stops of varlous lengths at, bus st,ops. Putllng lnto and leavLng t,he curb often lnvolves the use of trvo Lanes. Trucks need tc nake deLtvery and -oick up stops, .often of lengthy duration. r,Ihen the curb lane ls not avallable for thls functLon, t,he t,ruck usually uses the second lane and acts as a t,rafflc blcckage. Autos often use the street,s fcr through journeys and do not desire to;nal<e stops. or use Hovrever, turns related t,o off-street parking facilitles parking or other functions are alsc conmcno of the ôurb lane for D¡ríng turning mcvenents, large buses and trucl<s must utilize two lanes to coinplete t,he naneuver .{t ttmes of the day when feqr vehLcles are on t,he streets trouble. t.hese ccnflicting st,oc and movement patterns cause llttle greater vehicle volunes are on the road these conflicts cause Ìlhen or great,Iy ccntribute t,c congestlon. Vehlcle nodes are thus �Smlth - t5 largely unable to fulflll thelr functlon ln a reasonable manner during tlmes of congestton. Bus prtorlty st,rategies nust, not, only þrovlde for bett,er transtt servlce Èut must also consl.der the needs of uhe other modes. Sorne sacriflces of conventence will have to be rnade ln the of better urban transportatlon. :ì,o example of this prlnclple name ls the lrnoact of bus ¡:rlorlty st.rategLes on truck servlce. frucl< service is vitaL t,o the health of t,he CBD. However, at' certaln tl.mes of the day, lt provides rnore overall harm than good, 3us prlcrity strategles nust t,herefore ban any type of truck act,lvity on bus-onJ.y facllltles durlng hours of especf.ally heavy bus vol"umes. In return for possible mlnor lnconvenLences, merchanÈs wfll recelve a more vtable downt,cwn area vla better transiL servLce. Dally truck servlce, however, can be provlded on faclllties as exclusive as bus only streets. From 9:30 êr 11:30 arn, fron I:30 pm - 3:30 -oil, and frcrn 7:00 pn - 7:00 am would seein Èo be suitable vreekday hours for t,ruck dellverles on bus onLy streets. Clty bus lanes would be barred t,o t,ruck rush hours. A lcng term Þersoective shouLd seek new ways Èo lmprove the flow of gocds in downtown areas. A system of undergrcund dellvery points night,, for lnstance, bê attenpt,ed along wlth dol¡ntov¡n redeveLopineat. gerhaos cne large t,ruck area shculd be prcvided for fairly substantlal dcr,¡tttor.¡n areas. Ccnveyors would connect tbls t,ruck facility vrith erea esLabltshments. These are exotlc soluticns of the future, Fcr the present, bus ¡rricrlty st,rategies r,¡j,lL have to rely on t,he regulation of aliowablè onJ.y durtng hours for truck activity. Taxls serve as an irnportant rnocle of cubllc transpcrtat,lon 1n urban arees. .ìs such t,helr potentlal for servlce cannct, be ignored in the fcrnulatÍon of any bus prlority rlans. 'srpical taxL eruislng for rassenger oatt,erns using bus prlority facilltles v¡culd seem to be unacce.ptable durfng peak bus hours. Hovlever, at. off.-peak hours t,a.xi-st,ands can easlly be provided even on bus only streets. During Late evenlng hours tt v¡oul.d be rational t,o use these stands as t,he fccal point, for transoortat,ion act,Ívlty. This v¡ouLd allov¡ t,he elirninatlcn of noney losing bus runs at, that time of night. Strategies wcu1cl have to be lmpÍemented l.n order that, thls service v¡oulC not, be a ftnancial hardshln t,o ci-tizens cf nrcdest, inccne. The models whlch are presentäd ln the second'sectl.on of t,his report favor the est,abllshmenÈ of a nunber of new taxi siands cn downtorvn Ì,lashington st,reets, sone on bus only streets. This strat,egy provides the publlc wlth good taxl service while cut,t,lng down on- excessive eruläing. The pattern of exlstlng bus routes and translt st,ops must be considered rvhen deslgnlng bus priority syst,ens. Bus patrons are Lntlinate with present st,cc and route locatlons and have adJust,ed thelr conmutlng oat,terns to these rocations. rn order to establlsir bus prlority rout,es, however, some adJust,ment, of t,hese bus facilities wiII prcbably be needed. îhis 1á because �Smlth - 16 consfru cted vla route adJustments. needed bus volurnes wtlI beneed to be adopt ed to gulde t,hese Certaln Pl annlñg crLterla atron nay reaP be neflts and onlY mLnor changes ln that t,he bus P routes should leave readJ ustnent $Ioes. The n errr systen of bus able time and dlstance accePf every rnaJ or activltY center wlthtn Chang es of routes should be parameter s of maJor bu s factltties. ll¡nited to one blocl< in anY dlreeLlon whenever Po ssible. Thus, lt, the .oatron rvl 11, flnC hls new bus ston, if stemls inov êd, only a of bus grloritY sy oLd. very short dl stance fro:n theto al d The transfers b etween bus llnes street s shoul ct also att,enPtto eLl minate the need for transfers. and t,o the extent Posslble St Ave Thus for exanole, lf F St and Pen nsyl vaniaents between 14th tt mi.ght well segn and 7th St are to become bus PrlcrltY pr ove desirabl e to have Pen som e buses ô in ers anslt 3Or s on torlty streets 1n of bus stoPs on bus Pr must also be anaLYzed. rel,atlon to raPld rail transit statl,ons for cocrdlnatlcn deslrabtlltY In Washfngton thl s means theThe loêatlon of maJor bus Prlortty statlons. wlth future l4etro of t,hese statlons. streeÈs should be withln ccnvenlent' dlsta nceservlce w11,1 Provlde Thls author belleves that, while feeder bu sstatLons , A COflat outlylng ME tro wtth transfer Passeng ers of transfer activlÈY wl11 be neede d ln the sld erable anounÈ to dcwntcwn area. Cne unlgue orcb len dces exl st in regard whtch rnlght t,he i^lashlngton situaticn. ì, numb er cf street,s be torn uP for es w111 be conslCered fcr bus P rlortt,Y strategl untll L974 to lmPlernent Ra ther than walt äetro construction. f eels that streets Èhls abusp riorltY strategY, ctlon author be used in t,he arearnot s should subJecf to ;'letro ccnstru the street,s r¡hlch wlll bus Ð ri.orlfY sY stem. I tho se portlons of ld be consldered for be subJected to P:etrc s growt,h !Ðangs shou future auto str eets or rnal,ls. parlclng îhe locatton of present on-street, and off-etreet deslgns' to bus prlori'ty nol,ea in relation faclltti"" o,"råË-üethat a minlmun arncunt of dcwntown land feel-s Thls author .t'he auto. thereshould be nu"iirr".ã ro trrá parrrng r-r?"9" of on t'he be fore, t,hi" rupãii-fàels a lfmft shóuld or garages ln-downtown 'laced establishnent-óË-"ã* párrtng lctsHowever, a conétAurable ánouát of land and capltal' !,lashingtcn. the exlstence 1s presently tled to exlstlng p-arklng facl}ltles. bê reipected ln reference to of these facfifiies must thuã, the varlous olqners. Bus lanes and street's ;;"-;i;ht;-;¡ v¡lth a ¡rrlnimum aÌnount' of off-street shculd thus "oni-irct on-srreer par]<lng spaces consl.st of by iictltttes. [ãir.i"s ltmtteã ãapåcfty and rnay-be moie easlly displaced a only frcrn offbus prlority plans. In some cãses, openingsstreeÈs or lanes bus'prlorlty street parking facillttes ont'c The locatlng U" äIosed'at key hours and whenever possible ner¡t openlngs glven lYore àttentlon establlshed on alternate streets. parring garages must be t'han slngle to the preservation of orr-street ,n.V �smtth - 17 level Lots. Thls statement, ls baged on the grounds t,hat garages represent a more ratLonal use of land for parklng; Ìots are, in turn , viewed as a baslcally wasteful use of valuable urban la nd. Sone lots, sueh as the Grand Plaza lot at t,he foot, of l3t,h 9t, may be eonsldered for converslon int,o large parklng sarages. for those parking facllitles whlch nust suffer at, t,he hands of bus prlori.Ëy strategles, a system of Just, compensatlon should, of course, be uttllzed. Unlgue trafflc enálneerlng orcarams must also be consldered. rn many resoects trtashlngton has developed a very progresslve system of rush hour t,rafflc strat,egtes. Reversibte lanes such as Èhose found on Connectlcut .qve, help to adJust direetlonal street capaclty t,c rush hour vehlcle demand. Indeed, Rock Creek Parkway turns inÈo a ooe-rtrêy expresssray durlng rush hours. 1o the great,est ext,enÈ posslble, bus priorlty plans '-=hould be cornpllment,ary to these exLsting traffic programs, xn addltlon, many lane and curb regulatlons are tn effect, ln reratlon to downtcwn clüy streeÈs. The lrnpaet of bus pr!.orlty _olans on these regutatlons inust, be äxplored.n A large nunber of t,rafflc slgnars can be found aL downtown lntersectlons. The sequenótar t,lntng of these slgnars rnust be adJusted fcr bus priority use. fhis slgnal pat,tern must be cornnlementary to overalL trafflc flow as lnfluenced by signallzat,ion. Dov¡nt,ovrn i^/ashlngton cont,alns a number of unlque road feat,ures in t,he form of underpasses. ixanples of -Èhese faclllties can be found at, -riashlnqt,on, )urpònt, and Thcmas circres. At the present t,ine t,hese undercasses carry substant,ial numbers of vehlcLes, rnostry privåte autcmobiLes. The utlIlty cf these facllit,les nust, not,.be danaged by bus priority schemes. rn eff ect, the aut,o rout,es est,åullshed by t,hese underpasses act, as ccnstralnt,s on what tyge of downtown area bu:- prlorliy rout,es may be pl,anned. underpasses under t,he MaII such as the extst,lng l2th St facllity and the forthcomtng 9th 3t' facillt'y alsc act as focal polnts ior t,he est,abllshnen[, of ãrrte routes. rt ls lmport,ant t,hat vehlcles using present bridgesand freelra!¡s into i.fashington have convenient ròutes to t'he off-street parking sÞaces which wlI1 remal.n tn existence. By plct,cing t,hese baslc constraints on a îâp, t,he planner can begln to fathcn t,he most, feaslble and cónrptemeätary uus prlorlty rout,es. there are a number of purely t,ranslt oriented considera_ tlons rvhich must be t,aken lnto account, vla bus priorlt,y plannlng. The essentlal rout,es select,ed must aia tr¡e translt systen 1n terns of;nore efficient use of equlpment, and labor. l{igher average operat,lng speeds help t,o rutftlt thls requlrement. The lnpact of prlority st,rategles on bus scheduling must also be explored. Bus prlorÍty st,rategles eannct be developed ln a vac-ttuÍn. �Smlth - l8 Theynrusttakelntoaccountcltylng.reglonalglSns.and èónþarautllry. Totar compatabll'ity a*empr a "i such plans oroJect, an autc dcmLnent be-ãËi"*"úed should. not""ri"iñ-ãegiée1f downtown area. In tf¡ts case bus pr'lorlty glans should presenL a well reasoned alternat,fve for púufrc scruti.ny. It' Is especially agalnst i*poit.nt t,hat, these pLans be_presented in the battle the core construct'lon in inè fnfrlnge:nent, of dämaglng fleeway bus priorlty plans area. .¡o fhe ex¡ent po"ãtUle, ho$.ever, human actlvity shouia take lnto accounL the iand use and pfans. Þiójã"t,f"r," contalned ln metropolltan area In satisfYing the obJ ectlves attrlbuted to the gcals and factors alreadY dlsctrssed ln this pa pêt, the obJectlves of sed. have t,o be a number of other gicals and factors wtll ç¡111 almost' comPromf. alwaYs The establfshrnent of bus ierlority pl ans of obJectfvesì Thus sets I nvolve trade-offs between differlng wt 11 always lnvolve a the t'mpl ementaticn of such Programs The Pot'entl certaln and som etines high level of cc ntroversy. extent the al to a certaln for controversY 1s enhanced because prevfous advantages. The auto is befng d eprlved of some of its reorderlng of transoort,at,ion Prlcritl es will be dtfficult Patterns. for those rqith a central interest Ln or esent, modal splitrole However, ff the bus is to be caPable oi fulfilLlng its ln a more efftcient nanner, t,he resolut lon cf t,he lmpending of frl ends Ð ed controversi es cit es. transit and mcre I ve able cen a A growlng nu¡Jrer of citles |n thls country and in other lands háve feiun ex:rerlnents wlth bus orlorlty strategies. of some sort óo:nestlcally Éf,e foitowlng cltles have utlllzed 3lrmlngham, 3oston, ¡us prtorit! lane: ÀtlanÈa, tsaltinore, Chlcãgo, i{airlsburg, i'linneapolls, i'{ashvllle, lievt Yori<, Rocheãter, San ¡uaã'and '/¡ashlngton D.C. fn Egrope the list of bus pricrity cities tncludes! tsremen, I{amburgr. flanover' i^tlesbadän, 3ruèseIs, Liege, tsarcelona, Parls, Gothenburg, Grcninger' mãrselIleä, Strasbourg, tondon, i'iilan, -Genoa, TurLn,Bergr, utrecht',_ The Hague, i4aastuckt, l{ylnegen, Rott,erdam, and Stóc?<holn. ':ne ôf Lhe great advantages clalnned for bus pilortty strategies 1s substanttally hlgher operating speeds ior trañsit serviee. Statlsttcs from a number of cltles tndlcate that thls obJecttve ls obtainable. In Peorla rush hour bus lanes on two adJacent one-way streets have result'ed ln a reported 25^.i Lncreaée ln translt speed. Slrmingrham has wLtnessäa a 2E"l decrease fn bus travel tlme on an etght block stretch of bus lanes. In Baltlnore, elght blocks of bus lanes on.Cathedral St. have produced reported lncreases of transit speeds of between 17% and 22\.7 Some cltles have concentrated on optlons whlch brlng buses lnto the central clÈy vla bus prtorlty systems. The Shlr1ey i{ighvray _oroject ls this type-of strat'egy. San Francisco cornnrutèrs have=Uèneiteea from an exclustve bus lane whlch carrles buses around congestlon at the San Franclsco - Oakland �Srntth - 19 Bay Brldgers t,oll collectlon plaza. The !,ane has decreased bus travgl tlmes over the brldge between flve and ftft,een mlnutes.S The strat,egy has proven so successfuf ttràt the lane w111. soon be ext,ended t,o a mlle and a half tn lengt,h. fhts rane handles up to flve buses per mlnute durtng tñe peat( of lts mornlng rush hour servlce. seatt,le has beàn the home of the trBlue Streak'r demonstratl.on proJect. Íhis strategy cooslsts of express buses uslng non-rêéerved freeway lanes to enÈer downt,own seat,tre. at_!h9 potnt of freeway=departure, buses use an exclusLve on-off, freeway ramp. Trãvel- tlmes ön the route lnvolved have dropped from-40 minutes to 16 mLnutãs.9 rn conJunctlon wlth thls $-rro nlrlton proJect a 55o car park and rt de ].ot has been establlshed. Further down the l{est coast Los Angel.es ls scheduLed recelve a ma jor_busway proJect,. An ll-mile busway wllr.be to built wlthln:and at.on! tr¡e-gan Bernardenc Freeway between l,os Angeles and El ¡'1ont,e. Total costs for t,he ploject are no$¡ proJected !o be _$-51.5 nrflllon. The l.ntt,lal-twõ year phase of t,he pran wit r see excruslve bus use of the Ëusway lanes durlng rush hours. fhe busway wllr have t,hree new Ëus statlons along 1t,s rtght-of-ïray and- con¡ect wlth exelusive bus curb ranes in downtown Los Angeles.lo rt, ls estr:natea that bus traver t,lmes for the facitrty durlng peak trãuis ,rrr be 18 minutes, whereas automobiLes wtil take between 35 t,o 45 ¡ninutes r,o nake the journey. A.bus capaclty of ooóõ passengers per hour 1s project,ed.II 3us coirumuters t,o Ner¡r york clty have had the happy experlence of using the r-495 busway bei,ween the New ,r"iã.y turnplke and t'he LincoLn Tunnel. Thls faclltty rnoves appiox!.mately 35,000 passengers on 800 buses lnto ì,tanhatten auirãõ the two hour am rush.rz Ðurlng a recent ralr strlrce the vaÍue of the r:495 busway was even more graphlcally demonstrat,ed. Durlng an !h"_two day strlke,_ rheaverág? o! 47,áoo pa=setrj"r"-conveyeá b-{ }1q3?.bu:.e" used tane during lr¡e mornlng perfod.rs Íhe lane relles on the use ofriro houioverhead elghty dl.rectlonal llne signals, 350 changeable trátric oosts ana 50 çlang93bre t,raffte srgns for fiorn nornal trafflc flow._ The busway whlch lt,ã segregattoninto New york heads easõ,wara uses a normally westward- t,rafftc 1ane. The rrwrong'-i¡¿y" bus concept has recentry tested ln the 5out,h Boston area. Buses uslng the etgh-t been roãg-u"ã'mllé lane have witnessed a 4-16 mlnute decrease-ln thelr trãve1 times.14 ResuLts of thrs experlment,-t,o datè rrave-ueen mlxed. Bus drlvers have expressed favorable reactlons and t,he bus companles claim passenger lncreases of approxlmately s1te6tto. F?I9vg, the state must .'estabrlsh' rhe Ëüsway by nänaplacing l2oo dtvider cones. rt ls ngÈ clgar, at thls'tiñ,",-iherher Èhe costs of the busgray are Justlfleå ¡y lncreased'bug patronage wlth a eorrespondtng drop ln ãuto volumes.l5 san Juan, hovlever, haE experlenced a great deal of, �StnlÈh:+ 20 success wLth wrong-stay buswaYg: Ipcalattracted 7oo'000 nêw -tnts type of,flcfale-stsate that ããr-uuã ptiãtily-Éunice oe ¿ã-aayË--õr-opéiãt1on.16' one passenserã-áuiri,s lts iitãÉ ctrt uy an- avera$elof, 30. route has seen tts runnlng tlmes revenues have fatr'motre than ml,nutes. Á-lf¿ã,OOO lncréase LnproJect.LT. covered thã :izo,öoo "oii of the , :,' t:'-' -. Dr¡rlng the last -decade some form oe ¡us. n1;".1t" laneE ln a number of have Ueen-ésta¡ltsfred on downtown streetsprlortty e¡cpgrlPents rãJor uruañ-aieãã. The results of these that of these have ¡een-mtiéa. It ls lmportant lo note -none eEtabllshthe dowr¡rown'pîrãiiiy irpÍ"mãnLattons have Lnvolved menr of uã-ãátirã syätem of, bus lanes. R,ather,-lndlvidual of iarylng length' have þeen' utlll¿eê'" street ""gtn.ntã -.-' some clties prl orl reported. suþstantlal success wtth -ãrãa have ty' Lanes -. Roehester* ela{rns*€hat,-lous - -. .-, --thel r eore piiãifiy lanes on two rôutes have resulted ln a 2úâ rLdershlp future RtS plans to ãáf" ã"ä ãããfdent, reductlon.lS In theconJrlnctlon-wtth express open park ã"á'rlde lots to be used ln wlth þus prlorlty l-anes. MlnnegPoll? regorts satLsfactlonthe downtown -wãie wlth eãtauilshed 1n- conJunctlon tanes v¡nfõñ nall-has a Nlcollet-r,lali. The nlne blockBefore.,the two lane transltway prtorlty-!1nes only wlndlng from block to block. 200 þuses-a aay traveled on.,^\icollet Avenue. Ncw 725 buses feels-lt hae had exuse the Lanes on a weekday.Ig Chicagocanal 9t a-nd rrlashlngt'on Ëus lanes oñ cellent ãüããã"" with tts belleves the resulte of bus lanes on e¿rãnùa re-oorts lt St. ÐlstrLct' Broad and ¡lalton st" úå*rã been good.2O i{owever, theof lts as a' result of Cofum¡fá rttnu"ued only falr-reEults early bus lane exPerlments. The washlngton area, lncludl.lg- downtown. Dlstrlct streefs, has been lñã ã¿áne for a'number of-bus prlorlty experlments Shtrley i{lghway.. durlng tfrã- iaãi decade. fn addltlon to the1n operatlon on the pro3ect, iuãh-hour bus lanes are currently follor¡rlng-ãt,i"ãi;r 1L¡., l4th, 16th, H-and-I. l{lth the Progresst servlce there of t4etro"and the furthei' deveio¡ment of Shlr.ley bus prlorlty presènt sÈructure- of wttl be refl.nements on the :' ,:'. segments. t A nunber of new bus prforl.rty strategles for the reglon Slmpson have ¡eeñ ãuggested. fn igOe thé consultlng flrn of- Governr,'¡ashlngton Councll of and Curt|n, ';i.- a Metropoll.tan the BaltLmcre and ments stuay, ã,tgg".t,eA Lf¡e converslÖn of Ð<press buses from eranch lnto a busway. ohlo's cãoi.åetorín the three suþurÉan shopplng centers would traveL overfrom busway seven oi lts second phase;.. buses after the conpletläir use Lhe faclllty-upon the completlon of lts bucn centers would For iñiia-pn."". Travel tlme savl.ngs -would be substantlal'be I the proJected tLme decreåise would tl¡spn,ã Corner buseE mlnutes , 23.r"¡ t4ontgonrery ifalt, 14 mlnutes, 35{ú Korvett'es Lane ' �tt\ Smtth - 2I Roctcvllle, 14 mlnutes, l4uo.2\ The completlon of t,he proJecüs second phase. srould nltness a three mLle slngle lane paved roadway etrelchlng from Arlzona Ave to K st. _3h._thlrd phase wourd extend the làne to chevy chase Lake. The rane wculd be paved ln such a way Èhat rati frelght servLce could contlnue Lo operate along tËe route at hours when,express bus sen¡lce wäs no! needéd. The plan suggest,ed t,hat buses uslng t,he facllJ.ty termlnate busway tn thä Faragut square, Federal Trtangle, and southrrest Mall areas of downtown '/¡ashlngton. A map of the Georgetown Branch Busway can be found on the foilowlng pa9€. rn early _ suggestlols1969 slnrpson and curtln supplted a further ltst fnvolvlng improved 9f fncLuded preferentlal bus bus coirñrut,lng t1mes. TtrLs llst treatment vta uée of wrong-lray Ianes at certäln lnt,ersecttons, irrrong way bus ranes on certalnstreets (fol examcle, Connectlôut gve ¡ei,ween Beach ortve lfoodllne-st,), bus drlver-acttvat,ed traffle slgnals, and stgnàt ""ã progresslon. Tlme savlngs of",þetween l0 Eo 2ó nlnútes for the varLous routes- was proJected.¿¿ A map of ercpress routes suggested ÞV_the study can be found oir page 29, a-mãp-ãhowtng 9 potentLal dcwntown dlstrlbutlon system for these roùtes Ls located on page 24. the Department, of Transport,at,lonr s Urban CorrLdor Ðemonstration Program may also test new bus _orlorlty strategles ln the washlngton-area. Ten clÈles have alrãady stäne¿ cor_ tracts in thls $3.9 mllllon dollar program. Waãhlnéton,s proJect concerns the south capltal street corrldor ãnd ts funded at the lever. Ehe program wtll lncrude neir,¡ frlnge ¡rarkfng$620,000 faellltles and addttionát ¡us iur"iãè, The Anacostla area wlll benef,lt^from expanded bus servlce and a publlc lnformat,ion progran.23 possible bus prlorrty strategl.es for the south capltal st (oouglas) ertage arä È"iãg'consfdered as part of the program. at- thg present ttme only å retaùr"ãrv small number of busesr use thts blldge. D.C. Traäslt rush hour lt,nes A!, 49, p9 accounr tor afpioxrñately so-ro"ãñänrs ln-the peak di.rectlons durlng the arn-and pm ruãh hourE. rn addltlon, a- small nurnber of w¡¿a busee croée the brldge lncludlng the D, s, and '¡t routes. Another type of. bus prlorlty strategy lnvolves glvlng buses an advantage at, slgnallzed interseãLlons. washingtoñ wtll soon-be_ the hone of -a maJor expertrnenÈ Ji-*riã--ty!e. rn the fall 130. washlngron !.nÉersecllons witt beeome irãiË oe 1 computerlzed trafflc contro_l system. Thé proJect, iã ¡"rñõ funded-t,o a t3r_zJs,69l level uy borf s-Federai r¡ígh*ay Adnrtnlstratton and urban Mass Transþortatlorr Admlnlst,iuirä".ã¿--luro oÈher citles, Ne$r york and Dallas, have ui""ãay-lnstalled senEor and computer systems t,o regulate trafflc ttlfrts accordlng to changlnq patt,erns of vehlcle demandg. Howeier, the 9.C. Programrwlll have one set of sensors for car and another set f,or buses. The purpose of the bus^sensorg ls to glve buses mere green llght tlme at lntersectlons.25 �С8¿ lhp I ur¡ - aLaL Iïoporcû (Þorgctonn Sruob hjurY -.1- d\ - -:{ t t 3 flGuRE 12 THE P Rq POSEO """""" aaaaaaaa aa gouæ.: Sinplor .ii? i,illÎl.v,} WABYUSWAY tXlSTli¡G STßEEIS Attl0 HIGHWAYS gd &gtln Ulc r{ th?'.Etff&S r¡d ohlr Ccorcrtorn Ãlü rt.tia"tutr"t " Phllrttrlphh, 196tlr s' )i Brrnah fqr �Sl,tù l,{aÞ 2 - Propoard 9uburbar Bur 2ä ñmt¡t '.1 -a,t-. .., ¡ RV E TTE i¡ MONTGOMERY MAIL ;i,-i '-3ùl ' .!<, l, PRINCE GEf)RGE,S., PTAZA t). I I i,- -t t FIGURE 3 POTENTIAL EXPRESS BUS ROUTES Souro¡: SÍnpsos end Curtln Tqaffl.c Inprovcncntr to Opcr¡tloE! PhfLedolphLr, l)@ t P. 2J Spc?å Exprc¡¡ Bu¡ :* �¡¡nIC¡¡ - Msg¿ propos¡d Dormtorrr¡ Dl¡trlbutlon for s¡burbr¡r 8u¡ ¿Õ Routcr lì t: ,t I .l -_ ¡ I I '-\ v :t-æi i'-"ìi'-- !- - q-' rl 'ri - r ---"-': ,l L,--.'-'t| '' LJ L,-.1 r' I I L. r"l ¡ I I i \ i 'I r-Ï -ì ri rl' ri ç-i n ,li, -r--l tlt l."..ui lr¡) L Íi:wT;ã, i! Þs3r(Ð .i .. ''--. .i_..-l!i -"': aù å i"i r--l ti t;l; Iî-ìF r1 i: L- I t --- ., 6-'r :I - --f ,.___t t¿, z o . i:Ír:;,l L-l t"l il Fi_: 10 Ë: C¡ I r: iJ'.._l ¡ E-:sil ll tì -it_ j- 2 :ö; \ L I I lr Ite:yr' ) "¡l (y :l ). l I L |- .-1.'",._1 e L L!*-- - -.n-, r I ) ú -á 'õ'ii t) ,J I ') ii tÈr ;rr,': ,r rrrlt{1t,,., ! r. ,,/- ù ¿ o ,r'.- ,,i 8¿l S, N à o i ,-....j lr:rJ ;-= -r- L---t .-1 l:.::;- RECÍ)MMEI¡OEO ROUTT rr¡.¡¡ OPTl0llAt llß0UIE áiâ'41 //.'ù-,i:ll \\ á,..:"i,; FIGUßE 20 D(]WNTOWN DISTRIBUTI()N AND C()LLECTII]N R()UTES Souroo: Shpror r¡d, Curtfn Opcr¡tloar PhtLedclPhl.rt 1969r p. íl t 1tõ4 .ö t- �The area to recel,ve the system conslsts of l,'tlsconsLn .{ve f rom ùán Ñess St, t.o i,l 5t., M SL. ftrom Key Brl'dge t,o Pennsyl¡qorth Capltal vanta Ave, r\ew York Ave fiom Bladensburg Road toarea bounded the St,.. an,å a large number of l.ntersectlons ln ¡V-í sL., Isth 5t, Constltutlon Ave, and the Potornac Rtver nõck Creek. A map of the computerlzed trafflc slgnal system on the followlng Page. âl;ncst 4OO D.C. Transit buses wlll be equipea yft! devices whlch Lurn red llghts green as they approagh controlled result wlll intersections. Pioponents of the system clal,m tt and fewer automoblle pol'lutlon ress ls shown il"*::ilu,i3r3î5ðta*, This author Ls not convlnced that all,or^¡lng buses tc activatet'rafflcslg.nalswll].resultÍnanovera].lsmoibther flow of trafflc. Holrever, t'he experlment does represent a progressive step and vallâ evaluattons can only be forthcomlng ãiier ttre system has acÈua1ly been ln operatton for a perlod of time. K :ãtreet Ls scheduled to reCeive a ner¡ bus lane in early october, The action ls necessLtated because Metro construceastbound tion is-planned for I St. the prlorlty outer lane of the lane durlng the wt}} beccme a bus mafn roaãway and evenlng rush hours. I St, _whlch wtll lose lts mornlng bus routes, currentty fras an easÈ bound fUsh hour bUs lane. The first üuses to shtft to the new Lane wlll be AB&W Farragut Square routes, Hrentually D-.9. ITllslt'rs.40-tn|... )., w111 s rouães and'a number of !{MA busesVolumeshLft to the factllxy.'' of D.C. Tranelt and At, the present, tf.me a substantlal I i{V&t4 l¡uses use K 5t lncludlng ÐCf s D and L routes and routes L,2,3, and 4 of ÞlV&:'4. 'Ihe most ext,enslve bus prlorlty project in the 'vlashLngton area at, t,he present 1,s, of cour6e, t,he ghtrfgV Hf_øþway Busway. ttre tnittaL ãtuay for thfs factltty was lnlttated facl'll'ty, tn ln L962. segments of, the CIperati.ona began over t,he inltlal Sãptember 1969. At that tln¡e the northern sectlon of the faäility, 4 nlles in length, had not yet been completed. :{orveverl'patrenage gains- oE-20% on routes -'gsfng the ne}¡ áxoruss'länes weie ãoted.28 In SepÈembet gf t97O.an addltlonal -e 1 L/2 niles of the facllfty $tere opened for exclusLve the rueh hour bus use. The rematnlng Vfrginta sectlons of ããrnporary Uus lanes was opened ln April l9?1. From September 1969 to l,ta.y 1971, impresslve growth st,attstlcs v'tere generat'ed ny tf," prolect. pationage showed a 63%- lncrease. (1,900 to i,ZOC).' tiie number of buses serving Shtrley routes jumped flom 38 t,c 62. 'Irave1 tlme savíngs of LZ to l8 minutes !'¡ere noted.29 Addlticnal improvemenÈs have been and wlll be undert,aken part of the Shlrley Hlghway Demonstratton. These lmproveas a ¡nents have been nrade posslb'le because of, the cooperat'lon and �iltt'b I'f¡p ô oonprtrrlz¡d u! lrafftc stg¡rl gytt6 for tþrntorn urrblrgtor e:!.!!. trD. t}{utcrD ci Yn0rillA t.¿ il0. i: I ¡ t sl. 8US?RloRlIY I o ',lil*o'tlïon ? PRor0stD o. n), r"l l- I ir v I É a. Ì¡/h¡t lt I it ;l ,.\¡ o '? t! ii ¡!tsp by roadbetl senson¡ iraffia lights at 130 Di¡trict Computer operatetl witt controt Sor¡rco: Etrgcnc L. MoYcr Uuhl¡Eton Fr¡t JuIY 30 , tntersectlons. At 38 tntþrsections, tlevices on buses will ¡Peed llght change. rgrnprtcr¡ to 0¡ntr.1 IrO 0.0. Intortcctl.r|ñt 19?O ZO �Smlth - 27 partlcipation cf nany lnstlÈutl,ons lncludtng the urban lvlass riiãni""irarton Adnrinisrratlon, the Federal Highway AdminlstraCommlssLon. ¿i;;; and Lhe :{orthern Vlrglnia îransportationacross the èxtended On June 14, reserve lane sãrvtce lA¡as of t,he 14t,h st Brldge. potornac River vla the new center span if,ii¿V ne', Uuseã-purchasea Uy !þ9 Ñ1r1.C vta an UMTA grant ;;;¿-åf"r ?ut-fntä servlce at thl"s tlme by the AB&W bus conpany.'lnaddit.ionalslxtynewbuses.areprÖject,edfor f n the next two yearË. ft should be noted theee ""r.rlcä buses contain an envlronmentai imprcvement pack.age J"fpof -r"ã" sears, ald carpertns. number Eit), ;i;-;";eiriãnrãä, -A fringe .park .nn-ifAe Lots arä also scheduled for t'he proJecf Road, ?ofn St, and semt"nary i"ãfúati'tE sttãs at' 3ac'<Ilek over- 1ryngrllllon are expected of $12 Road. Economic benef tts for ifre $7.5 miIllon Shlrley projêct':v Èhe shlrley It, became epDarent durlng the course-of-be harnpered by saved on thã Busway could prcSeãt that tf,¡ne force vras t.ime lûst on eiov¡ded Df strlct streets. A Èaskbe lmpLemented establlsþed tc determlne measures whlch could number of ;;-;ã;;-t,ráver Èirne on -rfashlngton streers. A iã"ã"**"cLatlons !,rere issued Uy tfre group i.ncludtng-bus prlorlty The Constltütlon iun"" for l4t,h st andenforcement ofÀve.lane task force report reguratfons musÈ bus tnai- "ãrrðã "[iãã"ãa be st,rictIY enforced Ianes exist st, the present time bus Priortty-lanes can be on a number found on map ci these of Distrlct åtreets. Anorlhbound, now has a bus and rlght óãgã- iE "- I4th Street,, S! S.',t. to turn only faÃä ãxienaing from C from MondayNew' York ave'lg St' to-Frlday durlng ;:'rr. fnis lane is in oþeratlon dtrectlon, 14th st has a the ain rush hour. In a southbound weeÌ<day urruni.,J-iusñ hour bus lane stretchl'ng frorn Pennsylvania .,ive t,c C St. itf, Street Is the sfte of a southbound bus Pennsylvanla Ave to anf right turn only lane runnlng from ln operatlon durlng fs Indepenrlence Àrr.. The 7th St, Iáne bgth norning JnA- evening rush hours on weekdâYS. I St has whlchiwlll be a bus and rtgñt-t,rtt ãni' Ianepresently rYnF. dtsconÈlnued eastward, ^be!*-" ln t,he near Étrtrrtu. lhe lane it. The-maJofrly of thl-s route 1s 1n iãen IZth st-;;ã-iitr, one and ;;;;";i;n ãùti"s' borh ain 14th-ptn rygþ. hours. i{cwever, thedurlng and l3th !t's operates only bfock segment, cãnnecttng :{ ãt, ls the home of a westbound bus lane ã"ãñi"g iusf¡ frãurs. lane ãtiãiJr,ing fron 14t,h st to Conneeticut Ave. Thls hours.is ln mornlng_ and evenlng weekday rush ;;;;"aiãn-euitng :ninãtly, I6tñ-SÉ pt.""n[,fy haE-bus-lanes running tn north and south rfi.recttons. e Ëouthbound mornlng rush. hour lane can be fonr¡rc1 betr.çeen Florlda Ave and o st. In the evenlng Êt rush hour a ncrthbound bus prlorlty lane exlsts bet'ween I and M St. I¡urther north päst Scolt Clrcle the lane conttnues between C 3t and V 5t. ì\t thls tlme bus orlorlty lanes On do$tntown "lashlngt'on �tuttå l.lap Prrront &¡s þ.lorlty lano l¡¡ t'trc Dl¡trlct of Colu¡blr (Aug. 5 ,I, 19?l) Not to Scale I6th st. w st,- Florlda Ave. 7- - 28 u st. 9:30am c 6:30pm noÈe3 yellohr lane marklngs can be found on 14Èh St. between E St. and Independence Ave. ln both north and scuth a¿. i'1 - 4 I I Bus Prlorl.tY Lane 'r 3t. dlrectÍcns Scot,t Clrcle t,h st. tI 4 - 6:00 pm 7 ¿ 9:oo am ÞL.. H St. 7th st. 7 4- ITth 5t. l4th 5t. 6:00pm E St. CcnstitutÍ¡n 7 - 9:00an Ave. 4- 6 ¡00pm I lz 1 4 Indeoendence Ave. e9t Shlrley Pennsyl*¿ al'¡t ;i: ¡;;ve. Busway 9:00¿ n 6:CO,.r n �Smtth - 29 streets do not, seem to represent a cornplete success. A number cf factors can be cffered ln explanation, As already mentloned cresent lanes represent geparate segments and not a cornplete system. Time saved on bus lane segments can be easlly lost at congested multl-mode bottlenecks. In addltion, there seern to be problems of enforcement. It ls lmportant ihat, aclequate poLlce personnel be asslgned to oversee and i:rot.ect bus prlcrity operatlons. t'ltthout thl,s step vl,oLat,ions can largely: negate the supposed benef,lts of all bus lane st.rat,egies. The fuLl cooperatlon of t,he poll.ce deparÈrnent nust l¡e enltsted by local offtcLals. At, t,he aame tLme the proper degree of acprecLatlon should be shown: Ln return to t,he nanpolrer r:roblerns cf the department. ¡Jlov¡ingf privat,e cars t,c make rtght hand turns from bus prlorlty lanes malces st,rtct enforcement of, rush faclllLles qulte dlfffcult. Indeed, ft, almost lnvtÈes hard to controL vtolatlons by nlferious mot¿trlsts. Therefore whenever posslbJ.e, rtàfrt hand turns by cars from bue lanes should be ¡:rohibited. At, the present tl.me thls strategy ls not belng follcwed ln regard to WashLngtonr s curb lanes. lhe prohlbltl,on cf a number of right, hand turns promlses not, only to orotect bus lanes but Èo promcte swlfter overall trafflc llow. i4any rn'etorists may dtsplay a htqh level of dlsdaln for bus prlcrlty lanes. They reason that the Mot,orlstre Creed gives the nilvate auto drlver right, of every square lnch of roatl at any tLme. therefore, a subst,anltal publlc educatlon prograrn l.s needed tn behalf cf bus lanes. XL should be emphaslzoC t.hat, sueh factlitles promot,e the overall good of, t,he communfty. Cert,aLnly thls is not t,oo great, a sacrlfl.ce t,o ask of a linrlted number of auto drlvers who Just rnay fl.nd they eajoy swltching to a swl.ft,er bus rLde. 'Îhe remarl<s lncluded ln the precedl.ng paragraphs are nct lntenrf,acl ín anly' üray to berate t,he bus lane experlnents already undenvay ln the Dlstrfct,. LocaL off,lctals and the ).C. )ãrarL:irent of i{lghways ancl Trafflc have been quf.te progresslve tn t,he st,eps they have already t,aken ln regard bus orícrity st,rategles. However, t,hls paper maintalns llashlngtion nust go beyond these ftrst steps ln order to obtaln a higher level of bue prtorlty success. The next sectlon presents ldeas dedlcated t,o the at,tal.nment of, thls obJ t" ?_ t,o ective. 3astara.che e.l{. ".ilere Come the Buges" Ì{.{qhwgy User Þa rterlv t97I , 9.4. Peat, l4arwtck and Llvlngstcn Sensi.tivlÈv ¡na}}LqlF 9g !þg ,:lvj*ua3ícn of e Bus fra!¡slt Svsten i.á a selected Urban ts". pf, eã effi îffi i ñãEõñ : -5u? eãñi-oã-ffi c-ffi , I.{ay ::ay 1970, pp. l7-L8. �6mlth - 3 4 30 Iblg., Peat, ttarwlek and LJ,vlngstone, pp. 5r2L,34,6L. Rainvtlle, Walter 5 ',The Imootrtance of ürban lranslt and fts ðffectLve Passenger GapacltLes" tn Readlnqaln Urban Transoortat,Lon (ed. ) Gecrge ivl. gmerk, Bloomtngton lndiána Unlversit,y Press, 1968r'p.17 7. !{lqhway "lcttog Coalttlog "9aet Paekil May 1, I971r p.5. Rae, John ,,The ¿Vclutlon of the Motor Bus as a Íransport i4ode'r Tiqh lpeed Ground lrqn-g-porlgELon Jgurnal, Summer s 5. 6. L97L, 7 -pftl- . IþI9. , Rae, p.229 . t3, 'rl3us Only Ccncept SpreadLng f.n D.C. i'fanE?ort, August 2?, L97L, p.l. - Ca1lfornla" Passenger 9. Bastarache G.i4. Iti{ere Come the Buses', glgþggLuser, Uay 197I , p.6. 1O. DeparUînent, of lrênqporÈat,:þ4 Neurs, June 23, Ig7L. 11,'lLcs ,âhgeles Rapld Busway" elty and Suburban 3.L3yg!, June 1971, p.6i 12. ;lastarache, G.iq. rti{ere Come the Busesrr Hlqhgav .EgI, ;.tay I971, p.6 . I3. DeÞartment, of lransporlatl.on Wg, FlIi^tA-sgI. 14. ,":'Vrongway Buses Rlght Answer for Commuters?'l * Passencrer 'f ranslt i4ay 29, 1971. 15, ";ìush äour Lanes for Suses are fest,ed on ilxpressway in Bos'tonr' 'ùIe\'.r Ycrk Tines, JuIy 11, L97L 16. 'rì^irong-,,¡¿y Prc.¡ves t,o be Rtght-?lay,, lgg Juag gtar, JuIy 10, 1971. L7. ",frcng-'o¡¿y 3us,:Xperiment te Contlnulng Passenger Transcort , August 13, 1971. 19, "T'ransl! Idea L97I. :l<change" Downt,own fdea tn San,fuan P.R.,' Exchanqe August l, 19" "luses-cnly Transitway inoves neople Faster on MÍnneapolts ;ì.iicrllet j,{alI " Passenger Transport, l"lay 29 , L97O. 2C. \nerlcan "Iransit ¿\ssoef.atLon Reserved Bu6 Lanes Ingulry, iioril l?s7 ---r �Sml.th 2L. Slmpson and Curtln ovtn Parklnq Ð<oress 31 ess Bus Travel Ttmes ïnõechio rans onPñllã¿etpht a: ernments, Coun 22. Slmpþon and Curtln ln PeaK - Excress Bus lravel ',,Jashln nuary n vem es to 23, DeÞa{9nen!, of Transcortatlon Nggg, .Iuly 16, 1971. 24. -rt$or D.C. Buses Llght ts Always Greener as DoT Funds Preferentlal Trafflc StgnaL,, .....-..T Transoort,, July ÞaEsenger 24r 1970. 25, r'Conpueers_ t9 Help Ease Caplt,al Traff lc't Nen yor! Tlmes. August 2, 1970. 26. "computer to eontrol Llghts at 130 rn.tersectlons tn D.c.,, washlnqton Eg$, July 30, 1970 27 . Etsen Jack 'rBus Lane scheduled for i( sÈ. rr :dashinqton !ost, August 17, t97I . -:28, Hcward, l{eedres, Taninen and Bergendcff Feasibtltty study fcr Bus Rantd Transtt, vrtth shtgey itiqhffirw vd¡rîE-r-T-Iffi paileaffiri'nffiñ-Gu ãêrr-b r Governnents, l4arch 1970, pp. !-1. 29. Morln, Ðonald A. The Ner.r lllqhwav AcÈ and tsus'tranglt (speeèh slven at)ilãsGnffi?eñìãã õE-rfiË-ffi Transl.t Associatton, May 25, l,97l. 30. Bastarache, G. M rHetre Come the Buses,, Ëlgllggj¿ !¿æI, t'tay 1971, p.5. �slü¡ - 12 Shlrlcy fltghrray B¡rraY Ìtap 6 N 9 tr /l w SHIRLEY HIGHWAY CORRIDOR MAJOR ARTERIAL HIGHWAYS E ---' s 50 DRIVE LEGEND U.S. INTERSTATE U,S. HIGHWAY I lr :.., ': o I STAÏE HIGHWAY I Shlrhy Buan¡ .: Sourco: lloward, l{eed1cs, T¡¡urcn and Bægcnrlcff Rapld Transtt ln tho Shirlcv Hichw¿v Oorrlqgq E¡e¡lh1lltv Studn for Bu¡ t{cv Tork¡ 19?0r p. 4 �$nt -J- . - l.l 3 úË o ¡ |- ÊÍäH 33 .-_- -- :1' ¡l ,' l' ü trotØ 7l ro tk¡ - I r z c) iJ il¡o¡cé ô. I I-ir. 'i *; H3{ .{ ,tt \ Ptü =7Ë /.ì I il {-. :J /r_.. tf (: (- Q.í, 2. ¡; L ;{ I o lll[ri. c 'i-i I : l' - ''Jiri i,ï L r+ liL!' ç-,--. -lL- (' f-: *-,t. Þ t- '-t fft I r! I _¡! I l' " .;: il VI '): ! Ø m -l ili 6 T q: =ii=iit i i * rr it 'r lji Ii-.;,i rr t' o ,t r.i -lLJ!'--..- :-r; -ìr;- a--:) I r".ii li il !J-\- ,J-=i ii n:'lL ,l- t.: tf.: I r l, 'I t. ¡¡i tl:- ,t. -'it--1r----:, i; il . ;ii i/:i -¡" il, i(l1:lT'. -'T- Scurao¡ Hor.¡md, Nocdlcc, lrmcn end Borgcndcff, FculblLltv Studv f¡r Råqid lrenstt tn tho Sht;'1¡v-ï{shurv Corildor fc Brr¡ �Smith sEcTt0N I l: - 34 BUS . PR I OR I TY MODELS FOR DOT.'NTOT.JN T.'AS H ¡ NGTON The purpose of this section ls to describe two bus priority models which have been developed for use on downtown District of Columbîa ,i.""tr. gur only lanäs, mar,!ly in use only during rush hours, form the central stratågy of ine fi rit model. A downtown core of .bus only streets ïs the maiñ'feature of the second model. The tWo models, however, do share a number of corirnon features of the bus priority lanes in effect in downtown \'Jashi.ngton are these of the bus and right-turn-only variety. All of judgedland segments by-the-author occupy the curb láne. This type of strategy ìs somewhat ineffective' oi ti'tis report, based on site'ìnspection, to. bebus and right-turn-only Three types of maladies involving autos in the lanes are common-. First, a numbãr of cars have been observed to use the lanes without making the required right turn. ¡f the number of offenders of this varieiy is small, the detrimental effect on bus lane ápuritionr is minir"l. it't" second type of vi.olation involves cars which siop ìn the bus lane in order to gigk_u? or-discharge passengers. A as few taxi cabs havã been observed ìndulgîng In this activity as well private cars. ihe author's observatioñs of this problem seem to indicate the auto/taxi stop lh"t tt," violation is relatively rare. lf bus lane operations is only is not of a few seconds duration, the effects on încreases with ãu"tly-;";i;;;. r¡t. r"uui¡ty of disruption, however'. iÀã långtfr of the stop and cän force buses to leave their lane and conflic[ with auto trafflc in order to pass the offender. The third problem, conflïcts caused by right-hand turns onto cross ,ir"åtr, can become quite severe. To a certain extent a simiìar problem is generated by movements ¡nto and from the curb lane !nto off-street p"r[ing faciliiies. This right turn conflict problem is at the present time far more severe on streets where bus prîority lanes are currently not in effect. The problem is especially acute on K Street and Pennsylvania Avenue, but exists tä a varying degree in a large number of other Most s t reets A typical right turn confllct on a bus lane or a regular street develops number ¡n-iñ"-iolio¡¡ng-r"nn"r: The light turns green and one or aor cars of car cars âre in froñt of a bus in the curb lane. The first ããri.ã io t"L"'a right turn and begln to make the måneuver only to itr""r oi pedestrians blocking the completion of.the turn. "ãnfr¿ni-" Often this stream of þedestrlans flows ai a human blockage during the iå:ãi¡iv ãr'iiÃà "u"iiable for the sreen portion of the sisnal cvcle' As a result movemàni in the curb lane comes to a complete halt-and the ultimate resuìt is a small number of vehicles per curb lane belng able io pro"""d through the intersectlon per green period. This problem can a bus to wãit one, tt^ro' or rnor; cy¿les before proceeding through ""rr" an intersection. ,) �smi rh - 35 Allowing rîght turns by cars from bus priority lanes contributes to some extent to another intersectîon blockage problem which does not invoìve pedestrians. Heavy traffic flow in the cross street to the bus lane often causes substantial vehicle saturation on the block following the right turn. Vehicles are waiting for a red light one block from the right turn. lf traffic flot^, on the cross street is of a substantial volume, its capaéîty to obtain additional vehicles to obtain additional vehicles via right turn movements can be severely limited. The end result Ìs often a blockage of the right turn movement with the corresponding stall of the curb lane following the turn. A more serious version of this problem exists where right turn movements are not needed to achieve cross street saturation. At tímes volumes on the cross street are of such an extent that some cars do not complete theír journey through the intersection and block all movement via the curb lane. tlhî le this problem cannot be al leviated by banning right turns, it can easily be recognized that allowing the turn only complicates the problem. or truck usage of any type during hours of bus lane operatîon is apt to severely limit the effectiveness of the strategy. ln the opinion of thîs author, bus lanes should be maintained as exclusively bus facilities if they are to experience a high degree of success. The abolition of rules permitting any type of vehicle in the lane other than buses and emergency vehicles would make enforcement easier for polïce personnel. Any car or truck found in the lane for any reason would thus be a graphïcally apparent violator. This factor could only serve to make enforcement a rnore viable task. Any lack of enforcement would also become glarîngly evident and publ ic officials could easi ly pinpoint zones of neglect and take steps to remedy the situation. Auto Thus, the bus lanes to be used ín th¡s report will be exclusive facilities duríng their hours of operation. This requirement means that certain refînements will be needed in bus priority strategies presently used in downtown ìlashington. One such refinement ls a more ready identification of bus lanes and their hours of operation for the information of the publ ic. ln this field the Dístrict of Columbia's Department of Highways has already been extremely progressive. The present blue and red bus priority signs are of sufficîent size to be easily spotted. ln additlon, these signs are rnore aesthetic than the normal traffic sign. The paintîng of yellow dashed lines in the involved lanes is another'sound progressive step taken by the Department. A number of problems still exist, however, and must be alleviated if truly exclusive bus lanes are to be implemented. The hours of operation on present signs are somer^rhat difficult to determine. A quick blance at the signs is not satisfactory for identifïcation of a.m. (7-9) only or p.m. (4-6) only sígns or signs covering both a.m. and p.m. bus priority operations. Thís is because the color patterns of all sign variations are similar and a certaín loss of preclse hour identification must occur. The same problem exists betbreen signs governing bus only blocks and bus and right turn only blocks. This latter problem, of course, woul'd be el iminated .by the el iminatlon of the right turn permit. �smirh - 36 ln order to more easïly identify bus lanes and theïr hours of operation to the public, ¡t is suggested that a uniform color code be adopted for both signs and lane markïngs. Thus, for example, signs governing a.m. rush hoúr bus lane operations would be red with whîte letters. The corresponding dash lines on the surface of the bus lane would also be red and the wording r!6rr"s only a.m. rushil would periodîcal ly b9 Rrlnted on the pavement. il't. hour parameters of the a.m. rush would only be printed on the red signs. Two versions of the red sîgns should be used lo ruinforce ¡he bus ãxclusive message. VersÌon one could read rrbuses only a.m. rush 7-9:30 a.m.rr, and version two t'no cars or trucks a.m. rutir 7-9:30 a.m.rr. For afternoon rush hours a similar scheme would be adopted but the color code would be blue for sÎgns and lane line¡. Bus lanäs to be operated during both rush hours would be controlled by a red and blue sign and a reã and blue lane line pattern. (Rt the present time two parallãt yellow lines are used in bus lanes; under the scheme suggested one line would be red and the other blue.) tt mlght be wise to make the a.m./p.m. bus lane signs of larger size than those covering a.m. only and p.m. only operations. The hours of operation for a.m. and p.m. rush hour operations should be sl ightly expanded. Present traffic conditÎons would indîcate the ro.n ¡ ni tloütt -shoul d be 7 a.m. -9 :30 a.m. (Monday-Fri day) and af ternoon hours 4 p.t.-6:30 p.m. many cases a curb bus lane may block off entrances to off street parking f""¡ I ities or busïness establ ishments. Cars impair the bus ln entrances. In some reach þrioriiy concept by using bus lanes todurlng these of lane operation. hours cases tirese entrances might be closed This is eqpecially the cáse when alternate entrances are available from other streets. trhere this kind of alternative is not available a number of options a¡e available depending upon the importance of the off street faciiity and the number of buses using the curb lane. Some facil¡ties,may need access from bus priority streets during hours of bus lane operatlon. This decìsion should be made on the basls of the access peÈmit being of sufficient importance to the well-being of the downtobrn area. ln these cases cars should not be permitted to use the bus lane but to cross the bus lane. A dístinctive lane marking pattern should be used at poînts where crossings of bus lanes are permitted' Perhaps a white cross-hatched pattern could serve the purpose; Cars would not be permitted to lnfringe upon bus lanes at any location not marked by this cross-over pattern. A question of traffic safety must be considered ín relat!9n to this stiategy. permitting cars io cross bus Ianes might provide opportunities for seiious accîdenti. However, if the bus lane is carrying less than 120 buses per hour, the average time between buses should be 30 seconds or longer. This amount of time would provide an ample opportunity for cross-over movements to be accomplished safely. ln cases where more than 120 buses an hour use the lane, crosslng zones should not be established in keeping with requirements for safety. ln these cases access �Smith - 37 to off-street fac¡l¡ties would have to be denîed during hours of bus lane operation. The justification for this step is thã satisfaction of the frgreatertr publ ic aood. Where cross over points p"rrltted, ¡t is ímportant that cars not be permitted to block the"r" lanes auiing bus thei r movements into or from the involved off-street faci I ities. Signs to this effect with a notifïcation of the fínes involved for violation posted should be at all cross-over polnts. This power. to approve.and establish cross over points could well be given to the Districtrs Departmen! of Highways. A procedure whereby any off-street facility could apply for a cross over should be establ.ished. Each application would be evaluated in líght of the need ior the cross over in terms of: l) alternatives availãbler zl the-need of the facility for the permit, 3, the impact of the.roré over on bus lane operatíons and auto traffïc flow,'4) the general public gàod. A gelgral policy of establishîng such zones only in cases where they are sufficiently necessary should be adopted, thereby keepîng the number of such points to a minimum. other advantages may well result from the adoption of such strategy. First, the cross over permit could become a revenue a generating measure. The establishment of such a cross over could cost, for example, $200 ínitially with a $100 fee for yearly renewal.'off-street parking facíl ¡ties would thus be requlred to generate much needed revenues for the city. As long as space is tõ be used for the unproductive, and possibly largely destructive, purpose of storing cars, ìt might as well contríbute something toward the solution of urban problems. It should be pointed out that the first requlrements of these zones is that they not produce a detrimental effect on the operåtion of bus lanes. The revenue function is only consídered a säcond good after the satisfaction of the ínitial requirement--the efficienI opeiatíon of bus lanes. Two Second, the strategy could become a tool for the development of downtown land uses. The regulation of access to off-street facii ities could serve as a method of regulating the location of such facilities. ln addition, the location-of bus prlority lanes could greatly influence the commercial and employment pattern of downtown lJãshingion. final stratejy ís needed in order to provide for workable bus lane operations. Right turns should be el iminated, to the extent practlcal, from streets containing curb bus lanes. This policy would convert a number of streets into true through streets foi subitantial segments. Traffic which would normally make such turns will have to be sãrvioed on alternate streets. This author feels that an effective through street would be provided with only one or two right-turn intersections per mile. ln critical segments, all right-turn nþvements should be abolished. This step should allow the creation of bus-only lane segments of at least four to síx blocks. The problems caused by riiht turn movements would be solved by this step, and bus lanes woulã become truly exclusive and, thus, effective. lt îs hypothesized that the banning of right turns would aïd all types of modal movements on the selected through street segments A �I Smith 38 in mind the basic strategic parameters which have been described, fìrst thi; rãport will nou, turn to a description of the details of theof this bus priority model. lt ïs ïmportant to note that some segments *à"i are íåentical with segmänts of the second¡ bus street, model . These segments will be discussed only ln relation to the first model and not¡i¡cation will be made that the segment will be utilized without Keeping change in the second model. present traffic conditions and bus volume flows in the Key Bridge-M Street area, west of Rock Creek, indicate the need for bus prior¡ty lanes. An examinatîon of some of the key streets contalning bus service 1n the Georgetown area lndicates, on the other hand, that bus priority be unneeded or unfeasible. One such street segment is lanes "oúl¿ between l,Jisconsin Avenue and Rock Creek Park. At the present Q Street tlme tnis zone is served by the D2 and D4 bus routes, as well as the rush hour Dl line; As of May Jl, 1971, Q Street carried the following bus volumes. (Note: All bus volume figures for street segments used in this report are approximEtions based on the author¡s analysis of the various bus companiest timetables. The figures represent MondayFriday bus service and do not take into account weekend service. All figures are totals for the period indicated' excePt for.the l0:3.l a'm'3:00 p.m. figure, which represents an average per hour.) Eas 7: oo a.m 9 :01 a.m l0:31 a.m 3:ol p.m 4: 31 p.m 6:31 p.m 9 I0 3 4 6 9 00 a.m. 30 a. m. 00 p. m. 30 p.m. 30 p.m. 00 p. m. 39 6 6 26 26 I6 t l.les T t4 6 t (per hour) t8 32 r4 From the data above, it can be seen that rush hour bus volumes on Q Street do not justify bus prlority lanes. This report will not ionsïder bus priórity lanes unless rush hour volumes are at least 30 movements per direction per hour. These cases will be considered only borderline. At a level of lr5 mphpd, the establishment of bus lanes wlll be considered important. At a level of 6O mphpd they will be cons¡dered necessary.' Another Q 6treet restraint ís represented by its wïdth--three lanes. However, buses are often caught ln congestÌon on Q Street during rush hours. To help this situation' tv',o suggestions short of bus lanes are made. First' Q Street should receíve more green Iight time from the t/isconsin Avenue-q Street traffic signal ' õecond, ieft hand turns should be prohibited on Q Street dur.ing. rush hours. (A serious problem does not exist ïn relation to right-hand turns. ) This report also does not recommend bus only lanes on lower t^tisconsín Avenue between R Street and M Street. This street ,segment is served by the followlng D.C. Transit lines¡ 30,32,33, 3!, 36.. B,:-volume data for this ságment of l,lisconsin Avenue is as iol lows (May 31 , l97l): �Smï 7: oo a.m. 9:ol a.m. l0: 31 a.m. 3:ol p. m. 4:31 p. m. 6: 3l p.m. North - 9:00 a.m. -10:J0 p.m. - 3:00 p.m. - 4:30 p.m. - 6:10 p.m. - 9:00 p.m. Tl2 8 th - 39 South --30-= 12 I l3 33 (per hour) t8 2g 2\ t9 Again, the data indicates that bus volumes are not high enough to justify bus pr.iority lanes. ln additïon, lower I'lisconsin Avenue has a rather strange traffic pattern in relation to hours of congestion. During rush hours, parking is prohibited on this segment of the Avenue and traffic flows freely. During business hours and evening hours, parking is permitted. I./hen this parking is combined with the commercial and night life functions of Georgetown at these hours, one finds business hour and evening traffic congestion. Thís congestion definitely hinders non-peak hou,r bus service but cannot be cured vla bus lanes. A possible solution is the banning of al I parking on l,lisconsln Avenue between Q Street and M Street. Merchants may complain, but only a small number of parkîng spaces would be affected and they cannot possibly servïce a large number of customers. The existence of these few parking spaces presently leads to high levels of off-peak hour congestion and their el imination would be a substantial aìd. Some minor bus rerouting is suggested for lJisconsin Avenue and wlll be covered shortly în the upcoming discussion of M Street bus lanes. Present conditions ìndicate that Key Brldge and the Georgetown segment H Street are in definite need of bus priority lanes. Key Bridge currently is used by the fol lowing I,rVl4 I lnes: l, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, I l, as well as D.C. Transitrs route 38. Bus volume figures for Key Brïdge are as fol lows: of /: oo 9:ol a.m a.m l0:31 a.m J: ol p.m 4: 3l p.m '92 00 -t0: 3o - a.m. a.m. 3: 00 p.m. 4: 30 p. m. 6z 30 p.m. North South -ã'r -5i29 34 t8 18 30 36 48 (per hour) 95 From this data it can be seen that rush hour bus priority lanes on Key Bridge would be an important contribution to bus service to Northern Virglnla. Present traffic conditlons on the bridge reinforce this conclusion. lt is suggested that one lanê be made þus only northbound into the Dlstríct during the a.m. rush hour and one lane be made bus only shouthbound into Vlrginia during the evening rush hour. to which lane of the six-lane bridge should become bus priority during the two rush periods- is difflcult. The north and south curb lanes are not suitable because of movement to and from the tlhítehurst The decision as Freeway and the George ttashington Freeway. ln addition, a right turn �I Smith - 40 onto Canal Road from the innermost northbound lane is a constraint. Therefore, this rePort recommends that the lane adjacent to the north(7-9r30 a.m.) bound curb lane belome bus onty during the a.m. ruãh period and thé lane adjacent to the southbound curb lane during the p'm' i"rf,-p"ri"ä-tt:"6tió p.r.). The author does not feel that the cumbersãme lask of laying bo*n.traffic cones to set off the bus lane should be attempted. lnsiead,, the appropriate red (a.m.) and blue (p.t.) this i"n" r".kirrgs should be used with the corresponding signs' - lnenforcewould probably be more effective. Strict case overfreã¿ signs ment should accoñpany the first weeks of the lanes¡establishment in gain the compl ;;;;r io "*pàaite'thä publ ic education proce:s g!d.be permitted,toiance use and airport buses should ãf motor¡sts. lnterciiy it results from a suffïcient test period prove the Key Bridge lanes. ih; K"i Bridie bus lanes contaìn sufficient capacity t9 adequately handle additionaì modal flow, a further experiment might be attempted' The lane could be utilized by taxis. This report does not favor the use of any type of bus priorit-y facil ity by car þools. Backers of this approach do not seem to detect a basic flaw in their reasonïng. Car poàis represent a more effîcîent use of the private autåt*U¡lul As suth they add a neu, element of :.trength to rush hour travel by car and represent a distinct threat to the use of pubtic mass tr"nrpåri"t¡on. Minimizing the evìls of the car, for instance' îhe need for l"ir'p"rking spaces, will only make it nore difficult for publ íc transit to gain patrons. Amazingly enough th¡s s.trategy ¡s åft"n masked under the iabel of trbalanced transportatîontr. However, if'"-rr"-àf bus príority fac¡l¡ties under certain conditions by taxis can be defended on the grounds that this mode is public transportation and can help stem the floodtide of private autos' The Key Bridge rush hour bus lanes are viewed as a temporary strategy and thus in the future they would have to be evaluated in the light of the completion iro u*p""ted developments. The first development would becompletion of Three Sisters Bridge. yï!h .the of the'presently in .l imbo this faäi I ity¡ iraff ic volumes in Key Bridge trrqlgh!.rr drop to levels where the bus lanes would not be needed. The secondEñ-t is represented by tf," op"ning of Metro service to Rosslyn in 1975/?. t'the¡r Metro reachesto Rosslyn, rãny Northern Virginia bus commuters might wÌsh to transfer ;Á; råtí¿ r"il system for lhe completion of their Journey. ln this case bus movements would be needed across the Key Bridge' not nearly "t at"ñy lnãeed, only shuttle bus might run between Rosslyn and selected areas of l./ashingtän. lf this situaiion occurs, the bus lanes could'also be abol ished. The Key Bridge bus lanes are also lncluded in this reportrs.second model without change from the above description. Only one bus reroutîng D.C. Transit is suggested in reiation to bridge service. Route 38 ofRosslyn. At the at a locatlon other than should be alìowed to terminate present time this line carries very few pa.ssengers across-the Potomac River. lt is sutgested the 38 be rerouted to terminate with the G-2 by �Smith - 4l Georgetobrn University. A map of the suggested change is presented as Figure I in the Appendix. This alteration of Route 38 applies to both of this report's models and should result in better bus service for the Georgetown area and hopefutly more passengers for D.C. Transit. at The author estimates that rush hour bus lanes on the Key Bridge would save Northern Virgínia transit users between one and three minutes, depending on the degree of bridge congest¡on. This saving by itself is small and wî I I not produce an army of VJVH bus patrons. However, as wîll soon be seen, the Key Bridge lanes will connect wîth M Street bus lanes which, in iurn, wi I I conñect with other improvements. Thus, small time savings in any single segment such as the bridge lanes will result in substantial tîme savings over the length of the bus priority system. As a final conment on possible strategies for Key Bridge, a system of reversible traffic lanes might be developed. This type of plan would have to consider the total traffic movement capacity of the Key and Roosevelt Bridges and any anticipated effects via the planned Three Sisters Bridge. The provision of bus lanes on M Street is of an even more vital nature than the Key Bridge lanes. This increased need is brought about by two factors. .First, M Street is used by more buses, and second, the degree of trafflc congestion on M Street between Key Bridge and Pennsylvania Avenue is much more severe. Before discussing the details of the proposed M Street lanes, it is worth notîng that this street and the paral lel Ì,lhïtehurst Freeway are f I I led to capacity at rush hours. The reservation of rush hour lanes for buses will probably thus create a hardship on private cars using M Street during these hours. ln addition, if the M Street/l,lhltehurst Freeway pair is considered as a system, no real rerouting optlons exist for cars due to the nature of local Georgetown streets. Therefore, bus lanes on M Street will definitely résult in more congestion and longer travel times for auto users. 0nly a new Potomac shore freeway could negate this conclusion. The opening of Metro service to Rosslyn could also help soften the impact of this conclusion. point in relatlon to this situation. M Street cannot adequately handle the number of vehicles which it presently carries during rush hours; ít certainly could not handle any increase. As an auto dominant facility, the street îs a rush hour failure. The only real solution is to improve bus service. The new dìsadvantages which would be faced by the car would hopefully drive the more prudent l./e cannot ignore a main auto user to mass transit. ln this manner a cycle favoring mass transit would develop. As patronage încreased, vía bus lanes, the need and justification for even greater mass transit improvements would be generated. To deny buses the use of these lanes îs to deny this mode an opportunity to compete with the car. Thus, the M Street lanes are supported on the grounds that the community will benefit more from better bus service than ít will lose from addltional disadvantages to the private cår on certain crucial street segments such as l'l Street. �Smith - 42 ln addition to the bus routes already listed for Key Bridge, M Street carr¡es rush hour Route 7 of between the bridge and |lisconsin Avenue tlVM and is served by route D3 of D.C. Transit. As mentioned, it ís recommended that 38 I ine buses be rerouted from this street segment. ln order to service the few patrons nou, using the 38 buses, it is also suggested that WVl4 be given permiss¡on to carry Passengers from this M tireet segment to and from downtown D.C. locatíons. The fare for this servicã would be 40C. Thls step would be a beginning to the better integration of D.C. Transit and IJVM service and fares, The D3 and 7 routãs add 14 buses to the a.m. volume total llsted for Key Bridge, bringing the fîgure to l12, and ! buses to the p.m. rush hour total, brinõini ttre fiture to 104 for l{ Street between l,lisconsîn Avenue and Key Bri dge. for this segment of M Street would consist of one eastbound lane in the a.m. rush period and one westbound lane during the evening rush. A map of the lanes about to be described can be found as Figure ll in the Appendix. ln the eastbound (a.m.) direction, no bus lañe need be provided in the very short stretch between Key Bridge and 34th Street. Buses will need to maneuver between the Key Brldge bus lane and the bus stop following 34th Street. For the remaining blocks to tlisconsin Avenue, two bus strategies were considered for the a.m. rush hour lane. The first plan would use the curb lane; the second, the lane adJacent to the curb lane. The first plan has the disadvantage of blocktng access to a considerable number of off-street parkïng spaces and the impediment of a needed right turn for autos at l,lisconsin Avenue. The second plan would result in the loss of one bus stop in the vicinity of Potomac Street and the need for a cross nìerge of bus and cars beiween two lanes inmediately after the 34th Street bus stop. In addition, cars ìeaving facilities along the south side of M Street and desiring to make a lãfthand turn at ttisconsin Avenue would need to cross the bus lane. Bus lanes The author, after a considerable amount of del lberation, deci'ded on the second plan: the use of the lane adJâcent to the curb lane as the eastbound a.m. rush lane. The reasons for this decision were that no left turns need be permitted at ly'isconsin Avenue. ln addition, the cross merge problem at the 3trth Street bus stop wlll probably be minimal and the nãed for retentîon of the Potomac Street stop is not vital. Thls is especially true because it ls recormended that a major bus stop be located in the block immediately fol lowi ng l,liscons in Avenue. The limited number of passengers using the ellminated stop could be served at this stop and at 34th Street. The cross rnerge problem at the 34th Street stop will probably be mlnimal, since this stop is subject to low usage and even less patronage can be expected wlth the rerouting of the 38 lîne. Most buses would probably not switch lanes in proceeding f rom the Key Bri.dge lane to the M Street lane. Thus, ¡t is reconmended that an eâstbound a.m. rush hour bus lane be established on M Street at a point starting 100 feet to the east of the lntersection of M Street and 34th Street and extending to I'lisconsin Avenue. This lane would be �Smith - 43 in the second eastbound lane or lane adJ acent to the curb lane. The curb lane could then service local off-s treet parking faci I ities south of M Street and a right turn for autos a t VJlsconsin Avenue. The prudent motorist would fínd that further bus lanes on M Street and Pennsylvania Avenue would make a right t urn at Wisconsin desi rable. I ndeed th ís reporter bel ieves a mandatory rl ghthand turn at l,li scons ï n Avenue should be în effect for vehicles using the eastbound curb lane during the a.m. rush hour. Lanes 3 and 4, depending on whether reversible lanes were in effect, v\,ould carry through eastbound traffic of a non-bus nature. The eastbound lane would be open to airport and intercity buses but it is recommended it be off-limits to taxis. A similar problem exists in relation to the selectíon of the appropriate lane, curb or adjacent to the curb, in the p.m. urestbound directíon. This problem was influenced by the exîstence of two high volume service stations and auto dealerships on the north side of M Street. ln addition, the location of bus stops at 33rd Street and 34th Street added complicating factors. At the present time a major l'/VH bus stop also exists in the M Street block immediately west of l.Iisconsin Avenue. To make the problem even rnore complex, M Street congestion westbound in the evening appears to be more severe than morning eastbound congestion diff¡culties. The ultimate decision was made on the grounds that the amount of commercial activity on the north side of M Street between Potomac Street and 34th Street would prohibit the use of the curb lahe as a bus priority lane. This report recommends that a bus priority lane be established on M Street westbound in the evening rush hours. The facility would occupy the second lane, adjacent to the curb lane, between Potomac Street and 34th Street. Bus stops at 33rd Street and 34th Streets would be elimînated. ln order to compensate for these elimínat¡ons, the stop presently on the west side of t^Jisconsin Avenue would become bus-only during the p.m. rush hours. A cross merge problem would exist at Potomac Street when the bus lane changes from the curb to the second lane. However, since this area would be a bus stop at which most if not all buses would stop, this merge problem is expected to be minimal. lntercity and airport buses would also use the westbound lane between Potomac Street and 34th Street. ln cases where bus lanes occupy a lane other than a curb lane, the dashed pattern of colored lane markings already described may not be'adequate to catch the attention of the motorîst. Solid colors may have to be used in these lanes, at least on an experlmental basis. The lanes suggested for H Street between Key Brldge and l.lisconsin Avenue are included without change în Model Two of this report. As in the case of the Key Bridge lanes, the need for these priority fac¡l¡ties would have to be reviewed in regard to the openlng of Hetro service to Rosslyn and the openÌng of the Three Sisters Brldge. ln additïon, should substantíal reverse commuting develop or be encouraged to Virgïnia, a consideration of using both lanes in the morning and evening rush hours should be undertaken. lt is estimated that the eastbound morning lane would save Virginïa commuters betb/een one and three mlnutes, depending on traffic conditions, and the westbound evenlng lane between two and four minutes. �Sml th - 44 can be seen that the bus lane system suggested between ì,llsconsln Avenue and the Virginia end of Key Brldge would save bus patrons between 3 and 6 miñutes in the evening rush. It The need for bus lanes on M Street between l'lisconsin Avenue and Pennsylvania Avenue (Rock Creek Park) is quite crucial. Thls segment of M Street serves t^tVM routes l, 2, 3, \, 5, 6, 7, I I , and D.C. Transit routes 10, 32,33,34,36,38, and 03. Bus volumes durlng rush hours average-u"ty Éigh-in comparison with other street segments, and the degreã of congeition is especially severe. The following estimated bus volumes wãre in effect in May l97l: 7:00 a.m 9 :01 a.m l0: 3l a.m 3:ol p.m 4: 31 p.m -9 -10 -3 -4 -6 wt Eas 00 a. m. 30 a.m. 00 p.m. 30 p.m. 30 p.m. 48 28 49 87 l.les t Tõ4l 28 (per hour) 5l t32 for a more substantial number of bus stops on this segment of Street dictates that the lanes used for bus priorlty purposes will 11 have to be curb lanes. Because of the presence of two high volume service stations, the first reconmended use of bus lane cross-overs will be made. ln addition, the need for curb lane priorities brings about the generation of the right turn bans previously discus.sed. ln addition, it should be understood that truck deliverles would not be permitteá during hours of bus lane operatlon. ln reality the need for ã b"n on truck áeliveries during rush hours transcends the use of a curb lane for bus service. The need case of the segment of M Street west of l.lisconsln' Avenue where bus lanes would bã adjacent'to the curb lane, the prohibítion of the truck deliveries durîng bus lane hours would still be needed. The jamming of the curb lañe by such truck services would force cars into the bus lane in order to avoid standing vehlcles. ln the considering the effect of standing vehicles on bus lanes, the of parking meter location must be considered. lf rush hour i"n"s are utilizeã, parking meters could continue to be used at other -Shoul¿ ihe hours of bus lane operation exceed rush hours of the day. parameters, a good case for the abolitlon of the involved parking hour meters could be made. l^lhen problem parking meters do generate a certain amount of revenue for the District and thãir removal is apt to be vlewed with skepticism in some-quarters. However, three points can be made in relation to their removal. First' a confl íct between rush hour bus lanes and the meters can occur in situations where cars are not moved by the legal tlme !imit. ^One or two such vehicles could Jam up the operation of a bus lane. Swlft removal via tow:truck could keep this problem in check. �Smi th - 45 Second, congestion is currently experienced on many Dlstrict streets at hours other than rush hours (9:30 a.m.-4:00 p.m.). The operation of meters durïng these non-rush hour perlods of congestion takes away lanes needed for the movement of vehlcles. Third, the number of meters available in any sect¡on of the Dist¡.ict surveyed is small in relation to the number of off-street spaces. Ratlonal planning would seem to require the development of an efficient off-street parkíng plan while freeing the streets for'vehicle movement. Fees, including a parking tax, on off-street spaces could easily make up for the revenue losses generated by meter removal. This report¡s first model takes a flexible stand in relation to the question of parking meters on blocks havlng bus prîority lanes. lt would be preferable to el iminate meters offering possible obstruction to bus lane operations, but this may not be a popular strategy. ln bus lane segments carrying moderate vehicle volumes, the meters could be left in operation, given the exÎstence of speedy tov, trucks. Meters located on more heavily used bus lanes should be removed. As an example, the few meters in'operation on M Street between UJisconsín Avenue and Key Brîdge could be left in operatlon, while those to the east of the avenue should be removed. The second model ls far more bus-orîented and would require the removal of alì conflicting meters. As mentioned, bus lanes on M Street between l,lísconsin Avenue and Pennsylvania Avenue would be curb lanes. One exceptîon to this pattern would occur on the north side of M Street between 3lst Street and VJisconsin Avenue. A la.rge number of vehicles currently need to make a right turn from M Street north onto l.lisconsin Avenue. At times this turn becomes almost hopelessly congested and a curb bus lane would appear to be an unfeasible strategy for thîs block. lt is suggested that the westbound lanes of this block operate without a bus lane and that westbourrd DCT bus routes 30-38 be rerouted from the block. This suggested scheme is portrayed in Figure I of the Appendix. DCT buses would make a right turn onto 3lst Street and continue one block north to N Street. A left turn would be made at N Street where buses would travel west one block before making a right turn north onto l,llsconsin Avenue (tne 38 route would cont¡nue west on N Street). Thís rerouting would make it possible to eliminate the westbound DCT bus stop between 3lst Street and l.lisconsin Avenue on M Street. A new stop would be established on M Street immediately precedlng 3lst Street. Because of the space required for bus turns and operatlons, 3lst Street would have to become one-way north. The sâme reason would transform N Street into one-way þrestbound. ln real ity al I of Georgetobrnrs side streets could benefit from conversion to a one-þ/ay status, i.e.r 30th Street could well become one-way southbound. Conversion of Q Street to one-way eastbound and P Street to one-way westbound would certainly help speed up rush hour service for routes Dl, D2, and D4. This author considered placing the new bus stop on 3lst Street rather than t4 Street, but discarded the îdea because of the existence of a Post Office and the residential nature of the street. �Smi th - 46 l,/ithout the DCT buses, right turns onto l.tisconsin Avenue for other vehicles should be facil iiated. I.JVil buses would have to negotiate is a this'one block stretch without the beneflt of a bus lane. This reãlistic discover no i;;; ih;. desir"blu situation, but the author could way of eliminating the need for.auto right turns at lfJisconsln Avenue. However, since moãt of the WVM Georgetown routc would be via bus lanes, this oná conflict point should not have an overìy serious impact' especially since the DCT buses would be rerouted' Proceeding east on M Street and Pennsylvania from-t'Jìsconsin Avenue toward Waãtrington Circle, the followîng pattern of bus priority strategies would be established for Models one anã Two. All lanes would be curb lanes and they would onìy service transit and intercity buses during their hours oi op"ratÎon. Taxi usage would not be permitted' One lane would run east from tJisconsin Avenue across Rock Creek Park to 25th Street. No right hand turns would be permitted for any vehicles at Jefferson Streei, Jlst Street, and 29th Street. (n map of the bus lanes being discussed can be foúnd in Figure 4 of the Appendix)' turn crossovers would be provided at three locations: 30th Street to serve a busy service station, at the Government garage located west of Rock Creek Park, and 25th Street where service stations are would located. All entrances of the involved off-street facillties which have pattern, to be redesigned in accord with the single crossoverpatrons'.Only a would providä a certaïn amount of inconvenience for small number of áff-street parking spaces would suffer from the operation Righthand of this bus lane. eastbound lane in Model One would be the weekday a.m. rush (7 a.m.-9:30 a.m.). Model Two, which proJecls. a much greatår reliance on buses and a discouraging of.auto use, would see the lane in oferation during both the mornîng and evening weekday rush hours. ln aã¿ition, Model Two attemPts to stimulate the Districtrs commercial vital ity drriÁg Saturday¡s business hours and correspondin-gtV Àigf.,". Uus pârion"i" on tñis day. Thus the eastbound bus lane would be in operation from 8:30 a.m. to 6:30 p.m. on Saturdays' The hours of operation for this ln the westbound direction, a bus lane would begln at 25th Street, ready proceeding across Rock Creåt< to 3lst Street. At this point, as a.l äiscussed, OCf buses would turn north onto 3lst Street and M Street would be without a westbound bus lane for a distance of one block' No right turn woulã U" p"ttitted across the bus lane at 29th Street' Streets, n¡éfrt turn crossovers would be permitted at-?pth and 30th whãre high volume service stations exist. All of the crossovers described for this bus lane segment should be tried on an experlmental basis. Should too many autos ãesire to use the crossovers and bus lane oferatíons suffer, the crossovers could legitimately be discontinued despite adverse eifects on the involved service stations. The westbound lanb would block access from M Street to two off-street parking facilities which hold a total of over 100 cars. Alternate access points �Smlth - 47 should be sought, but here again the first príority is bus lane operatíons. At 3lst street, only DCT buses would be permitted to make a righthand turn, which would be taboo for the other vehicles, 24 hours a day, seven days a week. Hours of operation for l'1odel One would be the weekday p.m. rush (4 p.m.-6:30 p.m.). For Model Two, the lane would be in operation during both the a.m. and p.m. rush hours and from 8 a.m. to 6:30 p.m. on Saturday The implementatíon of this scheme \^rould create a severe pinch for autos attempting to use the Pennsylvania Avenue bridge over Rock Creek Park. This condition would occur because the bridge services only five lanes rather than the six to eight lanes available on other involved street segments. Perhaps greater use could be made of the M street bridge by cars to bypass this problem point. lt is estimated that time savings of betr¡reen 2-5 minutes could be obtained by buses traveling between 25th Street and l,/isconsin Avenue during weekday rush hours. For l^/VM buses, the total time saving from the Virginia end of Key Bridge to 25th Street could, in severe congestion periods, be at least 5-10 minutes. At 25th Street, l.rVM buses would leave Pennsylvania Avênue and proceed one block south to K Street. At this point they would use the K Street underpass to travel beneath tJashington circle. At the present time, the characteristics of the K Street-25th Street intersection prohîbít this proposed rerouting, and changes wíll be needed for lmplementation. The K Street center barrier at 25th Street will have to be removed so that buses can make a lefthand turn from 25th Street to K Street. This turn would be prohibited to any other vehicle, and no vehicle would be permitted to continue across K Street using 25th Street southbound. Therefore the barrier removal would servîce only bus turns and represents a new kind of bus priority strategy. Buses making a righthand turn from the K Street underpass to 25th Street northbound will have to be protected by adequate signalization from cars flowíng down from Ì^/ashíngton Circle in the outher K Street lanes. 0n:ly buses would be permitted to make the righthand turn from the underpass. This strategy wi I I get t^/VM buses to and from K Street quickly and spare them the hideous congestion of t/ashington Cïrcle. No special bus lanes would be provïded in the K Street underpass, which experiences a relatively low level of congestion compared to the circle above. A time saving of an additional 2-5 minutes is anticipated for this move. ln Model One, only t/VM buses use the K Street underpass,; D.C. Transit buses continue to use l,/ashington Ci rcle to reach their destínations. It is hoped that the rerouting of the ttVH buses wíll aìd the congestion woes of the DCT buses at thïs site. The author has been unable to discover any method of making bus lanes work at traffic circles, and therefore DCT buses wí I I have to brave lJashíngton Circle unaided. This site will thus probably become the most serious congestion poínt for routes 30-38. No bus lanes are included for Pennsylvania Avenue between �Smith - 48 25th and 24th Streets. Congestion on this segment ís produced by the Circle, not conditions on the block. Bus lanes would be unable to solve ihe problem and they would thus be superfluous. UIVM buses will use the 25th Street-K Street underpass route on a fulltime basis according to Model One. Model Two develops the 25th Street segment according to the dictates of a new central assumption. Model One can be put into'effect ãs soon as the K Street center barrier is rernoved and appropriatè signal cycles are established; it does not consider coordination wîth Metro. Model Twofs version is íntended for implementat¡on in 1975/76 and assumes the existence of a Metro statïon at 23rd and Eye Street. Thls statlon would bring about two changes in transit service for the street segments being discüssed. First, there would be less of a need for IJVM bus service from Rosslyn to K Streei, and perhaps a shuttle bus service could suffice. i¡us less htVM buses would be using the underpass route which highlights Model One. Second, a need would exist for connect¡ons between Meiro áervice and the 30-38 DCT routes. This connection could well occur at the 23rd Street Statïon. would, in Model Two, leave Pennsylvania Avenue at 25th Street and be rerouted from VJashington Circle. Some of the buses would use 25th Street to reach Eye Street, others would proceed through the underpã.r to K Street along with the remaining tlVH buses. Eye Street would bu"or" two-b,ay ìn ordèr to handle its new traffic and parking would be banned f rom 7 a.m. -7 P.ffi. , Ì'londay-Saturday. Figure 5 i n the Appendlx displays the manner in which this new arrângement would functlon. The auti'ror'has routed I ines 30, 33, 36, and 38 via Eye Street and routes 32 and 34 via the K Street underpass. However, this is only used for the purpãt. of an example and actual routing would depend on the needs of ttte'times. The manner în which the system blends with the total structure of Model Two can be found ín Figure ll of the Appendix, which pictures rhe entire model (Figure l0 displays in turn the totality of the first model). Buses using Eye Street h,ould entire Pennsylvania at 20th Street eastbound, and leave Pennsylvania Avenue westbound at 2lst Street. DCT buses usiÁg the underpass and K Street would be routed to the proposed H Street bus street. DCT buses There are a number of streets in the Foggy Bottom area presently carrying bus routes which were rejected by the author as candidates for new-bus lanes. 23rd Street running south between P Street and VJashington Ci rcle carries a.m. rush hour routes Dl, Nl , N3, and L5. No bus priorîty strategies.are suggested because: Present traffic conditions on 23rd Strãet (excluding llashington Clrcle) do not merit the lanes; bus volumes are not sufficient. Problems on this street occur at |Jashington Circle and lie outside the realm of bus lane cure. Rerouting is noi practîcal because extra blocks would be added to the average journey. Between tlashlngton Ci rcle and Vi rginïa Avenuer a.m. rush hour route D3 Joins the lines already llsted. No bus lanes are recommended for this segment of 23rd Street for the same reâsons as outl ined above �smith - 49 The area being discussed, P Street to Virginia Avenue via 23rd and 22nd streets, ïs only served by rush hour bus service. This report recommends that more complete service be given to the area by extending the hours of operatïon of the L5 route. lt ís suggested that L5 servíàe run at 3O-minute headways between 9:30 a.m. and 4 p.m., and between 6:30 p.m. and l0:30 p.m. on weekdays and 8 a.m. and l0:J0 p.m. on Saturdays. During rush hours, the L5 terminates in the State Department area. ln non-rush hours on weekdays and on Saturdays ¡t is recommended the L5 terminate at the Kennedy Center, which is now served by route 80. This new service would be the first full-time north-south servlce for the Foggy Bottom area. are suggested for 22nd Street running north betþreen Pennsylvania Avenue and P street (p.m. rush hour routes Dl, Nl, NJ, L5) for the reasons listed for 23rd Street. Expanded L5 service would use this street during non-rush hours. P.M. rush hour traffîc is also conveyed north on 22nd Street between Virginía Avenue/F Street and Pennsylvania Avenue. Route D3 and some Sl buses join the four lines listed for travel on this street segment. Again, no bus lanes and expanded L5 service are urged. some congest¡on does occur on z2nd Street between F Street and H Street due to local George lJashington University traffic. lt m¡ght be wise to let routes Dl, Nl, and N3 proceed north on 23rd Street unt¡l H Street, where they could turn one block east to 22nd Street. No bus lanes No bus lanes are needed on G and F streets in the George ttashington University area. These streets formerly carried route R6 and are nob, served by rush hour route R5. lSth Street is not, in lanes. ln Model Two, DCT service 25th street and 20th street is moved to Eye and K streets, as Pennsy.lvania Avenue betbreen 22nd Street and this reportr â prime candidate for bus between al ready mentioned. l^/VM rush hour Route 7 would be rerouted to K Street. 20th street and lgth/l8th streets on Pennsylvanîa Avenue, buses in Model rwo would have to switch lanes to enter the H Street busway. Therefore, under these conditions, no bus lanes would be required on the four-block stretch of the Avenue. Betr¡/een Present bus volumes on the segment of Pennsylvania Avenue are only moderate, with rush hour flow approachíng 30 vehicles per hour. Once past the horror of t/ashington Circle, eastbound a.m. rush buses find little congestion between 22nd and 20th Streets. Therefore, Model One suggests no bus lanes are needed. Traffic is heavier betþreen 2Oth and lSth streets, but the moderate bus volumes argue against bus lanes. ln the westbound p.m. direction, the congestion portrait of this street segment ís quite different. The vehicle flow is approaching l/ashington Ci rcle and the crawl is the style of the day. tn this direction a Model One p.m. rush hour lane stretching between lgth and 22nd street would be prudent. No right turn'crossovers should be permitted at 20th or 22nd Streets. This larie will not totally solve the woes of westbound Pennsylvania Avenue buses; thev will stîll have �Smlth - 50 to battle Washington Cîrcle. However, the bus lane wlll speed the to the jamtrahead of the pack". A tlme saving of between l-4 minutes is anticipated 2lst Street between Pennsylvania Avenue and Virginia Avenue ís served by a.m. rush hour routosr southbound, Sl and Pl. Bus volumesr 39 total buses a.m. rush, do not justify a bus priorlty lane, and Hodel One makes no suggestions for this street segment. Model Two sugg.ests these buses be rerouted to lgth Street, which would be provided with extensive bus pr.iority strategies. buses A number of streets în the State Department area, Încludlng lgth and lSth Streets between Pennsylvania Avenue and Virginla Avenue, C Street between 23rd Street and Vírginia Avenue, E Street between lgth Street and lTth Street, and Constitution Avenue between 23rd Street and lTth Street, receive very different treatment in Models One and Tbro. ln Model One bus rerouting is not attempted and the number of suggested bus lanes is minimum. ln Model Two substantíal bus reroutlng is generated and a system of bus streets (rush hour only) and bus lanes is developed. ln Model One, C Street betl^,een 23rd Street and Vi rginla Avenue receives no bus priority treatment. DCT rush hour routes using this street segment ínclude Dl, Nl, N3, L5, Al, and Xl amc,ng others. Rush hour voiumes are modest and traffic congestion is not serious over the fourblock route block south of C Street, a large number of WM and ABêl,l buses use the fac¡l ities of Constitution Avenue. l,rVM rush hour routes l, 2, 3, \, 6,9 connect with the Avenue via Theodore Roosevèlt Bridge. The volume of buses using this bridge is not high and no bus lane is suggested. The Arlington Memorial Brldge brings l,lVl'l rush hour route l2 anà-regular route I to Constitution Avenue. Thîs bridge is also used by a host of ABet/ Constitution Avenue buses. lncluded are ABEtl regular routes $, 6,7,8, ll and rush hour routes 16, 17,18. Qne Consequently, rush hour bus volumes on the segments of Constitutlon of lTth Street reach high levels. The a.m. rush hour period sees approximately 150 buses moving east from 23rd Street to l9th Street. At this point they are joined by DCT routes Dl, D3, Nl, N3. Thus, an a.m. rush hour bus lane is defÎnitely Justified. Therefore, Model One suggests a curb bus prlority lane running east on Constltution Avenue-fron 23rd Street lo lTth-Street (and beyond, as wlll be discussed later in thîs report). Hours of operation would be the a.m. rush Monday-Friday. No right turns would be perm¡tted at lTth Street. Avenue west ln the oppos¡te di rection, a p.m. rush hour lane l{onday-Friday is suggesteä. This lane wouid run from lSth Street to 22nd Street (no land 22nd and 23rd Streets because of required bus turns south toward Memorial Brídge). No right turns would be permltted at 20th,2lst, or 22nd Streets. The bus lanes suggested for this segment of Constltutlon Avenue in Model One would serve only buses and be off limlts to taxls. .' �Smi th - 5l No bus lanes are suggested for the Arlington Memorial Bridge. Traffic conditions on this bridge seem to be dictated by the existence of two flanking traffic circles. Therefore a bus lane on the bridge would only be of minimal value. lgth Street running south from Pennsylvania Avenue carries DCT regular routes 80, 82r 84, 86, 88 as well as rush hour routes 49 and F7. Thîs is a wide one-way street segment not subject to severe congestïon. Therefore, when one consîders the beìow 30 per rush hour bus levels (".r.and p.m.), no bus lane is suggested in Model One. lt may however prove helpful to ban a right hand turn for cars from l9th Street onto G Street durîng the morning rush hour. different picture exîsts on lSth Street moving northbound toward ia .during the ven ing rush hours. A great deal rnc,re congest ion is evident, and in addîtion to the 80rs routes DCT rush hour llnes Sl, A Pennsylvan Pl, \9, F7 are conveyed. Therefore, ä p.ffi. rush hour bus lane is suggested for lSth Street from E Street to Pennsylvania Avenue. No righthand turn crossover would be provided at F Street. Due to the less than 60 per hour bus volumes, taxis mîght be permitted to use this lane on an experimental basis. A far more extensive bus príority system is suggested for the same area in Model Two. Segments of C Street, lgth Street, lSth Street, and E Street would become rush hour (a.m. and p.m.) bus streets. These segments would form the east links of the bus street system hîghlighting Model Two. The reader wï I I note that the bus street system suggested for the State Department area totally excludes Constitution Avenue. (R map of these suggested bus priority strategies can be found in the Appendix as Figure 6.) There were a number of basic reasons for the decision concerning Const¡tution Avenue. F¡rst, Hodel Twots extensive system of bus streets and bus lanes could not ignore the need to handle acceptable levels of through auto trafflc in downtown D.C. The alternatives would be to build an inner loop freeway or an expensive K Street depressed highway. These are consÎdered to be the greater of posslble evi ls. Constitution Avenue is a major, eight-lane, eastwest street. lts west end connects wïth two major bridges. Traffic can flow to and from a number of major streets east of the C.B.D., including North Capitol Street, Marylane Avenue, I'lassachusetts Avenue, and East Capitol Street, vla Constitution Avenue. Thus, its ideal end connections make the Avenue a viable through auto route. ln addition, Constitution Avenue I ies somewhat south of the main commercial centers of Ì,lashingtonts C.B.D. The cityrs core would be far better served by usíng Pennsylvania Avenue east of l5th Street as a bus street. Çonstitution Avenue really only locally serves government centers of employment and is a poor generator of bus patrons except for approximately 20 hours a week. The învolved government workers would only have to walk one block in most cases to use Pennsylvania Avenue servïce. �Smi th - 52 Constitutio¡ Avenue could only be fitted into'a total system of bus streets and lanes with awkwardness. Conversely, Pennsylvan¡a Avenue because of lts central and strateglc location makes an ldeal center core segment of a bus street system. ABalll and IJVM buses in Model Two would use 23rd Street to convey them evening to C Street, which would be a bus street durïng the morning andrunning Street rush hours. No bus priority lane is suggested for 23rd south between C Street and Constitution Avenue. This lane is unfeasible because large numbers of cars need to make right turns onto the Roosevelt Aiidge. However, an a.m. weekday rush hour curb bus lane should be established running north on 23rd Street between these two streets. All buses would make a right turn at the intersection of C Street and 23rd Street Street would need to, because of the nature of local lane uses, be a different type of buÁ street than those found in the city's core' 0n bus street'segments such as H Street, l4th Street, and Pennsylvania Avenue, hours of operation woutd be 24 hours a day, / days a week; the privatá car r¡rould be total ly banned. However, tlis strategy cannot be justified for C Street between 23rd Street ând Virginia Avenue. óespite carrying many DCT, lryM, and AB6!,J routes, subs!"!ti?l bus vollmes, T5-gO úehicies per hour in peak dïrection, with 50 vehicles per houi in ittu other directi,on, are only present during-the mornlng lnd evening weekday rush hours. At all other times local auto and truck trafiic coulä use the street segment b,ithout problems. Thus the p'm' C Street bus street \nould only be in operation 7-9:30 a.m. and 4-6:30 C l'londay through FridaY. Despite its label, the C Street segment would not strictly b: bus only during these hours of operation. The south entrance to the State Deparlment and an entrance to the underground department garage is located on C street and is an off-street loop for official visitors¡ p;;ki;g (iee figure 6, Appendix). The Department must be assured the access-of vehicìes on government business during the hours of bus street operation. ln additioñ, access to the underg,round garage must be r"int"ïned. Therefore "0fficial State Department Vehicles" should be permitted use of C Street during its hours of bus street operation between 2Jrd and 2lst Streets. A system of identification for such vehicles will have to be established to allow effective police enforcement of the bus priority strategy. All other cars' trucks, "n9 taxis would not be allowed to use C Street during its hours of transformation ínto a bus street. of bus shelters and perm¡t parking must also be examined in relation to C Street. The concept of a bus street goes far beyond that of simply making better use of downtown streets and producing radical cuts in bus iravel times. A bus street implies a more complete t'transportation packagerrdesigned to cater to the needs of transit patrons. lndeed, the permanent bus'streets dlscussed later ¡n th¡s The questions �Smi th - 53 wi I I be total ly redesigned to complement the need,s of transit its users. Such a redesign ls unfeaslble in the case of C Street because of its limited hours of operation. Howevern the total amenities of the C Street segment should include bus shelters. These shelters need not be overly complex or expensive, since it is assumed they wíll service only a small amount of non-rush hour patrons. They would not need the heating or lighting components of shelters on fuli-time bus streets. lt is suggested that two such shelters be erected on the north and south sídes of c street just east of 22nd street. Two additional shelters could be constructed just west of Virginia Avenue. Because of the presence of the State Department, c street between 23rd and 2lst Streets contains a number of curb lane permit parking spaces. These spaces would conflict with the operatïon of the busway report and during rush hours. However, there would be no need to ban parking ¡n these spaces 9:30 a.m.-4:00 p.m. This report suggests a trade-off. 22nd Street between C Street and Constitution Avèñue would carry very I íttle traffic. Therefore, Ít could be transformed lnto a parking facility for all-day permit parking. Present permlt spaces on C Street would convert to visitor spaces during al I hours the bus street v,ras not in operation. As a final transportation mode for the State Department, a taxí standing area should exist at the buildingrs north entrance. Between C Street and the Pennsylvania Avenue busway, Model Two conveys Dcr, l.rvM, and ABEI./ buses via l8th, l9th, and E streets, state place, and southern Executive Place. ln a westbound direction, buses will enter c street via lgth street. To do this they will háve to weave some 50 feet along vi rginia Avenue. Adequate signal ization wi I I be needed. l9tn Street will remain one way south and in additîon to the buses traveling to c street will carry DCTts 80,s series of routes. These buses, except for route 8o to Kennedy center, w,ill turn left at l9th Street and Virginia Avenue and terminate at their present potomac Park lay-over point. C Street buses wïll in turn enter lgth Street at E street. Thus very high bus volumes will exlst on lgth Street between E Street and Virginia Avenue during rush hours. These volumes will exceed 100 buses per hour. However, ¡t is not recommended that this segment of lgth Street be turned into a bus street since îts width should enable it to handle a certain amount of auto traffic even durÍng rush hours. lnstead, it is recommended that a curb bus lane be established, a.m. and p.m. rush hours, for this link in the system. cars would not be permitted to make a righthand turn at Virginia Avenue but would have to continue on to Constitutïon Avenue. The one curb lane would be adequater gíven the need for some buses to turn left to reach their Potomac Park terminal. A bus stop just south of E Street at the Civíl Service Cormission should be provided with a C Street type bus shelter. Runníng south from Model Twors H street full-tlme bus street would be an a.m. rush hour bus lane to E street along lgth street. A right turn cross-over should be established at E street for cars. use oi the l9th Street lanes would be denied to taxis duringrhours of opera- tion. �Smith 5tl Leaving C Street, eastbound buses will run one block on Vïrginia Avenue to reaàh lBth Street. ln additlon, the eastern terminal of DCT routes 82,84,86, B8 is located on the south side of this block. No bus priority strategy is suggested for this one-block segment. Cars and trucks coming east on Virginia A.venue wîll usually turn south at l9th Street to reåch Constitution Avenue. Adequate signal ization wi I I be needed to convey buses from C Street to Virginia Avenue and other vehícle modes from Virginia Avenue to Constitution Avenue safely and quickly. only a few cars wilì desire to use Virginia Avenue to reach iatf, Sireet. This situation will exist because of the existence of bus lanes on lSth Street and the banning of right turns from the street until Pennsylvania Avenue is reached. Thus, since only a small number of cars will wish to use this one-block segment during rush hours, no priority strategies are needed. Since the bus stop on the south side of this block is the terminal for a number of all-day DCT routes, it is suggested it be provîded with a somewhat more substantial shelter than iñose erected on C Street. This Virglnia Avenue shelter should have heat ancl I ight facil ities. wíll turn north to reach E Street. routes, however, will continue north on A substantial lSth Street to reach the H Street full-time bus street. Only a p.m. rush hour curb lane wíll be needed for buses between E Street and C Street. No righthand turn would be provided at F Street, and no Upon reaching lSth Street, number to of buses DCT off-street faci I i t ies. Between Virginia Avenue and E Street, rush hour bus volumes will average at least 75:lOO vehicles per hour in the a.m. rush, with somewhat ìess substantial volumes ïn the p.m. rush. Thus two bus lanes' curb lane and and adjacent lane, are suggested for both the a.m. and p.m. weekday rush hours. No rÎght turn crossovers would be permitted. Using this strategy, this segment of lSth Street could still handle a modest number of ca¡:s. A bus shelter should be provided at a stop Just south of D Street. ln addition to rush hour patrons' this shelter would crossovers reach better serve mass transi t patrons from Constitution and lighting should thus be considered. Hal l. Heating Street buses will leave lSth Street at E Street in order to reach lTth Street. Thîs one block segment becomes, in Model Two' a rush hour bus street. Unlike C Street, where official State Department cars would be able to use the busway, the E Street busway would be banned to all cars during its 7-9;30 â.fi. r 4-6:30 p.m. hours of operation. However, taxis woulã be eligible to use the street. lt is suggested that a taxi stand be esta6lished on the north side of the block. A bus stop complete with shelter would be located on the south side of the block at iTth Street. Thus, this one-block segment would become a multl-mode publ ic transportation street during rush hours. C �Smi th - 55 The same strategy is suggested for New York Avenue between lTth Street and lSth Street. This one-block segment would become a rush hour, a.m. and p.m., busway carryîng buses brest toward lgth Street. A bus stop with shelter would be located on the north side of the block. 0n the south side of the bìock, taxi patrons would find a taxi stand. No bus priority strategy is suggested for E Street between lSth Street and lgth Street. Very few cars wîll use this street during rush hours because its only access for cars will be a lefthand turn from lSth Street. These ie* cars should not hamper bus operations on this one- block segment. I n order that access to the entrance of the E Street Expressway not be overly hampered by the bus priority strategies suggested, it ls recommended that 20th Street between VÌrginia Avenue and E Street be made a two-bray street wîth appropriate signalization established. The entrance to this facility via l9th Street rìght-turn to E Street will not be hampered during the p.m. rush hour since that streetrs bus lane north of E Street operates only durîng the a.m. rush (even during the lane hours of operation, ã Fight turn crossover would be available). prìority strategy is justified for lTth Street south of Pennsylvania Avenue in Model 0ne. ln Model Two, all buses usíng the two blocks involved would be rerouted via l8th, l9th, and E Streets, aga in mak i ng a bus I ane unnecessary. I n l'1odel Two, I 7th Street between Pennsylvania Avenue and Constitution Avenue would be another major street segment devoted to the movement of car and truck traffic and would be without local transit routes. No bus As has already been described, Constitution Avenue ín Model One would have an a.m. rush hour curb bus lane running east between 23rd Street and lTth Street. Right-hand turns would be banned at lTth Street during the laners hours of operation. This lane would continue on across lTth Street past the entrance to the t/ashington Monument parking area to a point 200 feet west of l5th Street. At this point, cars would be permitted to enter the curb lane to make a rîght-hand turn at l5th Street. Between l5th and l4th Streets, the lane would be re-established and right-hand turns will be banned lat l4th Street. Although a number of bus routes use Constitution Avenue eastbound ln the p.m. rush hour, their total volumes do not Justify the establishment of a bus lane. (DCT routes Al, XI, 87, F9, P9, G/ generate approximately 40 trips between 4 and 6:30 p.m. ABst^, routes 5, 7, 8, and IJVM route 8 add about 2j rnore trips to this segment of the Avenue.) ln addition, traffic congestion is not severe moving east over thís segment of Constitution Avenue during the evening rush. The same logïc dictates the establishment of a p.m. rush hour bus lane running west along the avenue between lltth Street and lTth Street. An a.m. lane would not be needed because of bus volumes and traffic �Smith - 56 conditions. This curb lane would run betv'reen l4th Street to a poînt 200 feet east of lTth Street. Cars would be permitted to enter the iane at this point for a right turn north onto lTth Street. No rîght turn would be permitted at i5th Street on the entrance to the Ellipse. Model Two reroutes all transit routes from thìs segment of Constitution Avenue As already descríbed, these lanes would use Model Twors system of bus priority routes in the State,Department area. Buses would flow Street Letween'this area and the Pennsylvania Avenue bus street via E and South Executive Place eastbound, and Hamilton Place, South Executîve Place, and State Place westbound. This group of streets would be converted into a.m. and p.m. rush hour busways. ,A constralnt similar to that found on C Street also applies in this situatïon' A i"ig"-nrrber of government perm¡t parking sPaces exist on the street segñents being cónsidered for rush hour busways. Even the most opii,nistic trånsit patron could not real istical ly suppose these permit rãå"är *orfã U" etim¡nated. Thus, those cars assigned spaces on the street segments lïsted would be allowed to use the buswaY dullng its hours of ãperation. ln addition, vehîcles leaving the l'Jest^Exect¡tlve Áu"nu" p"rkïng lot would be able to use State Place to reach lTth Street. An 'easily visual method of identîf ication for these cars will be needed to insure proper enforcement of this strategy. All other cars, trucks, and taxis would be barred from this busway link during its hours of oPeration. As the reader can see from examining Figure 12 in the Appendîx, Model Two: Streets t/ithout Local Transit Routes, the operation of this South Vrhite House busway will not cause total dísruption to the movement of other modes of traffic ln the involved area' Constitutlon Avenue will not carry transit routes, nor will Pennsylvania Avenue' úetween lSth and l5th Streets. Thus, viable alternative routes exist for the private car. ln order to eliminate possible interference to the busway from non-permit autos straying down E":! Executive.Avenue, l'lest ¡t is recåmmended thìs street be closed to the publ ic and,-l ikestep permit parking facîlîty. Thïs Executive Avenue, turned ¡nto a might allow the removal of some permit parking from busway street segments. Before discussing the full-time bus streets which form the core of Hodel Two, this ieport wiìl turn to an examinatïon of other transit corridors leading to CBD streets. One such corridor is the segment of Massachusetts-Avenue running betbreen tlisconsin Avenue and Sherlcan Circle. At the present time, ihis portion of the Avenug^caflies the fol lowing DCT .olt"t: Nl, N2, N3, N4, N5, 37, T2, 17, T9' 03t 05' Approximãte bus volumes for the Avenue segment'being discussed are: �Smith t JT Eas l.Ies -92 00 a. m. a.m -10: 30 a.m. l0:31 a.m - 3: 00 -4 30 -6 30 -9 00 p.m. p.m. p.m. l5 29 65 7 7 57 t t7 p. m. - 7: oo a.m 9:ol 3 :01 p.m 4:31 P.m 6:31 P.m l5 7 -2-5- il 7 (per hour) (per hour) These volumes indicate that an a.m. eastbound bus lane and a p.m. westbound lane would be considered. However, a number of conditlons ârgue agà¡nst the establishment of bus priority lanes on this segment of Massachusetts Avenue. The Avenue is basically a 4-lane route wlth 2-way traffic. A bus lane would thus take up 507, of the streetrs di rectional capacity in a rush hour. Reversible lanes, i.e., three lanes in the directíon of peak traffic and one serving traffic in the other direction, are not practical. Any blockage in the Iight traffic lane would force vehicles to by-pass by swingíng into the face of rush hour traffic. This would obviously be a very unsafe situation. The alternative of making Massachusetts Avenue one-uray durlng rush hours is also not realistic.' No suitable alternate route exìsts for the vehicles using this segment of the Avenue. Thus, the loss of access to and from the areas of northwest l,/ashington served by Massachusetts Avenue in hours of one-way operatlon would cause serlous inconveniences. ln addition, the one-way strategy would cause havoc to transit service in the non-peak direction. Thus, a bus lane would take one of two available lanes. Again, it must be realized no viable alternative route exists for this segment of the Avenue and a 507" loss of auto carrying capacity under these conditions would seem to be unacceptable. One unique constraint also must be considered. A substantial number of foreign embassies flank this segment of the Avenue. lt would be dÌfficult to block off access to these facilities via a bus lane. Because of these conditions, neither Model One nor Two recormends a bus príor i ty lane for Massachusetts Avenue between \^liscons i n Avenue and Sheridan Circìe. Buses which continue to use th¡s route will need to rely on other strategies for future congestíon relief. A reduction of the number of available parking spaces in the Distríctrs downtown core, for instance, could help ebb rush hour traffic on the Avenue. bus reroutíng might well, however, help travel times for a substantial number of patrons. No such rerouting would appear feasible for routes Nl, N2, N3,'N4, N5. However, rerouting of I ines 37, 72, 03, 05, T7, T9 is recommended. These new routes are suggested in both Models One and Two and depend on transit routes being allowed to use Rock Creek Parkway. Route 37 would leave Wisconsln Avenue at lJoodley street entrance to Rock Creek Parkway. Route 37 buses would then use the Parkwây to reach P Street, and P Street to reach their present 2lst and 20th Street route segments. This step should cut travel tlmes from Northwest t/ashington to and from the downtown area by approximately Some �Smi th 58 l0 minutes'. Routes T2, T7, T9, 03, 05 would depart f rom the Friendship Heights bus terminal via Mílitary Road to reach Reno Roäd. The buses would use Reno Road to reach Cleveland Avenue and then proceed over the route described for Route 37 to reach P Street. Route T2 should provide local service for residents of the Reno Road area and thus an increase in its schedule frequency uJould be desirable. rush hour buses it would receive would not of bus priori ty I anes. te 98. The add I t i ona I justify the establishment prior¡ty routes are suggested for Massachusetts Avenue east of Sheridan Circle betureen the Circle and Dupont Circle. This statement applies to both }lodels One and Two. Bus rerouting is again suggested as a strategy for speeding transit despite the lack of bus lanàs on the Avenue. Running east on the Avenue, DCT routes N2, N4, N5 are joíned by routes D2 and D4 at Florida Avenue (the other routes presently using this street segment are in Models One and Two reror¡ted to P Streei as already described). Both l'lodels One and Two suggest that the eastbound D2 and D4 routes be rerouted to P Street, wfriãh already carries the westbound service of these routes. This rerouting would consist of simply 02, D4 buses making a right turn at 23rd and Q streets and a left turn onto P Street one block south. Thus, in Model One, Massachusetts Avenue eastbound from Florida Avenue would carry only routes N2, N4, N5 and no bus lane would be needed. However, Þ street would carry routes G2,02, D4 and, from the Rock creek Parkway, routes 37, T2, T7, T9, 03, 05. P Streetrs new transit routes will justify two changes related to serving buses adeguately. l'lodel One ioresees the banning of parking on both sides of P Street between 22nd and 20th Streets from 7 a.m.-8 p.m., Monday-Saturday. tn addition, an a.m. weekday rush hour curb bus lane would be establíshed on the south sÌde of P street between 22nd and 20th streets. R¡ght turns for autos would be banned at both 2lst and 20th streets. A p.m. rush hour lane would be established, running west on the north side of the block. Right turns for cars would not be permitted at 22nd street. An offstreet parking facility exists on the north side of P Street between 2lst and 22nd Streets. A right turn corssover could be established to serve this lot. No bus Route L4 joins routes N2, N4, N5 ¡n the use of Massachusetts Avenue westbound between 20th Street and Florida Avenue. Model One suggests no route change or bus lanes for this two-block segment. Model Two foresees the termination of local transit r.outes on Massachusetts Avenue between 22nd and 2Oth Streets and the creation of a P street rush hour bus street. The hours of bus street operation would be 7-9:30 a.m. and 4-6.:30 p.m. , Monday-Fríday. No cars or trucks would be allowed on this two-block segment during lts hours of operation. However, taxis would be given access to the bus street and a taxi stand is suggested for the south side of p street Just to the east of 2lst Street. Again, Model Two ís seeking the establlshment of a multi-mode publ ic transportation street. To generate needed bus volumes for this P street bus street, Dcr I lires N2, N4, N5 and L4 would be rerouted to this street segment �Smi th - 59 Cars would be allowed to use P Street at all other hours, but two restrictions would be in effect. Flrst, parklng would be banned on a fu I I -t ime bas i s. Second, r i ght turns woul d not be permi tted for cars and trucks at 2lst or 20th Streets. Bus shelters complete with heating and lighting are suggested for stops on the north and south sides of P Street at 2lst Street. The P Street bus street ls portrayed graphically in Figure 7 of the Appendix. A number of street segments in the P Street area are not candidates for bus pr¡ority strategies in eîther Model One or Two. One such segment is 2lst Street between Massachusetts Avenue and N Street, which presently carries a.m. rush hour route 37. This route, as prevïously described, should use Rock Creek Parkway to reach P Street. Route J/ buses would then use the present southbound routes of DGT lines D2, D4, L4 to reach New Hampshire Avenue and 2lst Street. Thus, the three-block segment of 2lst Street being discussed would lose transit servíce. Florida Avenue between Massachusetts Avenue and Connecticut Avenue is also not in need of bus priority lanes. At the present time lt carrles rush hour route L5 in both north and south directions and full-time route L4 northbound only. ln Model Two, L4 buses would also use Florida Avenue southbound fo reach the P Street bus street. However, b bus volumes in both Models do not Justífy bus lanes on this street segment. of Metro makes ¡t d¡fficult to discuss bus priority lanes on Connecticut Avenue north of Dupont Circle. Metro hãs two distinct impacts on possíble bus lanes. F¡rst, construction of the system wí I I keep major segments of the Avenue torn up for the foreseeable future. Second, the financîal fortunes of ttMATA in the halIs of Congress and in bond markets will determine the northbound penetration of Metro trains on Connecticut Avenue. Given the worst of all possible futures, Metro service wiII only extend to Dupont Circle. ttith sufflcient fïnancîal support, the line will reach Van Ness Street; wíth complete financial support, Metro will serve Friendship Heíghts and The spector beyond transit planners may wísh to cut back transit bus service at an upper-Connecticut Avenue Metro station. Thîs stratégy would seek to :se bus servíce only as a feeder service to the rapid transit trains. It is difficult to see how this strategy will add to the total convenience of transit patrons, as lt forces a transfer. The tactic of turning buses into nothing more than feeders for rapid rail service does not really add to the total service capacity of public transportatlon. It substitutes one mode for another and leaves the real competitor, the prîvate auto, a rnore extensive use of downtown streets. Thls report wi I I therefore draf t I ts nrodel s on the assumpt ion that trans it bus service will continue to use Connecticut Avenue. At any rate, the lanes suggested in Models One and Two can be used until such a time that coordination wîth Metro becomes a real ity (1975/711, Some �Smith - 60 Calvert Street and Columbïa Road, Connectîcut Avenue carries the following DCT routes: 14, Ll, 13, L5, L7,19, and Q5. The a.m. rush hour volume (7-9130 a.m.) for this street segment ïs approxlmately Between 90 vehicles. The p.m. northbound rush hour volume is approximately 80 vehicles. lt is suggested that an a.m. rush lane be provîded south across the Taft Bridge, and a p.m. lane be prorrided northbound across the same span. This lane would take one of the two peak hour directional lanes in each di rection. Hopeful ly, auto drivers wi I I find thïs construction awkward enought to: l) switch their.rush hour modal choice to the bus;2) alter their route lnto the CBD by using the Calvert Street Brîdge. ln a southbound direction, no rîght turn would be allowed onto Kalorama Road from Connectîcut Avenue during the a.m. bus lane¡s hours of operation. Northbound, no right turn would be allowed at Belnront Road during the p.m. rush. Both lanes suggested would be curb lanes South of the Taft Bridge no bus lanes are suggested between Kalorama Road and Columbia Road. Since only a moderate amount of cars per unit time will be bble to complete the Journey across the bridge, such a lane is unneeded. ln addition, off-street facllities include a number o,f embassies and a Hol iday lnn, and a bìockage of access would be unwise. ln the northbound directlon, auto congestion would probably develop south of the bridge as cars sought to cram into theîr one lane across the brldge. This possib¡'l ity can be control led by creatlng an auto constriction further south on Connecticut Avenue. Thus ¡t ls suggested a mini bus lane be established on the short block between Caiifornia Street and tlyoming Avenue. This lane would cut the flow of northbound autos and protect the approach to the Taft Bridge lane. No bus lane is suggested between tlyoming Avenue and the Bridge, and right turns would be permitted at Kalorama Road. new tactíc for practlcal testing. that bus lanes can be used to constrict and thus control the fìów of auto traffic at critical locations. The strategy-postulates that only short stretches of bus lane may be needed in these locations because they will cut down on the number of cars able to enter street This strategy is hopefully offering a It suggests foilowing the bus lane. Thus the.expense of bus lane estabwill be less, as fewer signs and lane markings would be needed. liihment However, it is important that vehlcles be provided wîth alternate segments routes at the approaches to the bus lane segments. For example, southbound cars could use Calvert Street or Rock Creek Parkway north oi ttt" Bridge, and northbound cars could use Columbia Road or lSth S t reet The bus lanes suggested for Connecticut Avenue are part and Two with no additîonal strategies beíng featured by of Models the second One model. A time savings of two to four minutes is estimated for transit patrons over this segment of Connecticut Avenue. �Smith - 6l bus lanes are possible for Connecticut Avenue north of the Taft Bridge. The establishment of such lanes would be facilïtated by the Avenueis six-lane width and its 4-2 rush hour system of reversible traffic lanes. However, such lanes will not be dïscussed in this report, since such segments of the Avenue are considered to be north of tJasÉingtonjs centrál area and thus beyond the scope of this report. A variety of Columbia Road between Connecticut Avenue and lSth Street is served by DCT routes I+0,42,45,49. Approximately 48 buses make the southbound journey,during the morning rush hour period, and the same number make the evening northbound trek. No rerouting is suggested and the modest volumes make bus lanes unfeasible ïn both Models One and Two. Between Columbia Road and R Street, bus volumes on Connecticut Avenue are high, as Routes 40, l+2, \5, 49 are joined by I ines L4, Ll, L3, L5, L7, L9, and Q5. Despite the high volumes generated, over 120 vehicles per rush hour periods, no bus lanes are recommended between California Street and Le Roy Place. Lanes are unfeasible for this segment because they would disr"upt the complex traff ìc flow at the intersection of Connecticut Avenue and Columbia Road. Model One suggests an a.m. rush hour curb lane for the west síde of Connecticut Avenue between Le Roy Place and Bancroft Place. This lane would not extend the short additional distance to Florida Avenue. Many autos make a riEht-hand turn southbound at Florida Avenue, and a bus lane extending to the intersection would be an unnecessary obstacle. A shelter complete with heat anrl light would be well suited to complement this one-block bus lane segment. of Connecticut Avenue, a P.m. rush hour curb lane is between Florida Avenue and T Street. Right turns would not suggested be permitted onto T Street, but would be allowed onto Columbia Road. A heated shelter is also suggested for the northbound bus lane segment. Model Two advocates the same bus lane segments. However, in this case they would both be in operation during the a.m. and p.m. weekday rush hours. 0n the east side A northbound p.m. rush hour bus lane is suggested for the east side of Connecticut Avenue between R Street and S Street in both Models one and Two, This lane would not extend the short additional distance to Florida Avenue. Many autos make a right-hand turn southbound at Florida Avenue, and a bus lane extending to the intersection would be an unnecessary obstacle. A shelter complete with heat and I ight would be well suited to complement this one-block bus lane segment. Thls lane woutd serve all routes mentioned above except L4. Northbound routes 4Or 4Z,4J use R Street westbound to reach Connecticut Avenue from lSth Street. No bus lanes are suggested for this two-block segment because of modest bus volumes and not overly congested traffic conditions. �Smith - 62 routes Ll, L3, L7, L9 use the Dupont Cîrcle underpass to reach Connecticut Avenue at R Street. No bus lanes are recommended for the underpass in either north or southbound directions because of insufficient bus volumes. Rush hour South of S Street, routes L4, riCI,42 presently use tonneetíeut Avenue to reach 20th Street, where they proceed southbound vla the latter street. Express bus routes proceed south via the Dupont Circle underpass. ln Moclel Two, route L4 will depart f rom this route vla Florlda Avenue to the P Street bus street. Thus in Model Two, no bus lanes are suggested for the west side of Connecticut Avenue between S Street and Dupont Circle, or for 20th Street between Connectïcut Avenue and P Street. At the present time, routes L4,40,42 generate approxímately !6 trips in the mornïng rush hour perlod and 63 trips in the p.m. rush hour. Because of these modest volumes, no bus lane is suggested for 20th Street between Connecticut Avenue and P Street. However, an ê¡.m. rush hour lane is suggested in Hodel One for the u/est side of Connecticut Avenue between S Street and R Street. Thls one block segment would be ideally complemented by a heated and Ilghted bus shelter. No right-hand turn would be provided for any vehlcle at R Street during the Ianers hours of operatîon. Route L2 presently uses New Hampshire Avenue southbound between lSth Street and Dupont Circle. Both Models One and Two retain this rout¡ng for the L2 line and no bus lanes are suggested for this one-block segment. ln the min-portion of lSth Street between New Hampshire Avenue and Street, routes 40, 42r 45,49 are conveyed northbound, and route L2 in both directions. No bus lane is suggested because the 40's buses must make a left-hand turn onto R Street. Between R Street and U Street, lSth Street is served by the L2 bus line in both north and south directions. Low bus volumes mean no bus lanes are needed. R of U Street, the L2 line is joined on lSth Street by routes 92, 9\,96, 98. All buses using this segment turn right onto Calvert Street at the intersection of Columbia Road and lSth Street. Rushhour bus volumes do not exceed 40 vehïcles per hour in either the morning or evening perîod in both north and south directions. These North modest volumes make bus lanes unnecessary. Routes 92,94r 96,98 serve U Street between ISth Street and Florida Avenue. Again, bus volumes are not high enough to justify bus lanes. Returning to the Dupont Circle area, lSth Street between P Street and carries northbound DCT routes L2,4Ar 42, \5r 49. No route changes are suggested for Models One and Two, and bus volumes do not justify bus lanes for this street segment. New Hampshire Avenue �Smith - 63 Between Massachusetts Avenue and N Street, the bus volumes on lSth DCT routes N2 and N4 join the lines already I isted. Approximate bus volumes for the street segment being discussed Street northbound rise as a re: Noflh - lSth Street 7: oo a. m. 9:ol a. m. a. m. l0:31 3: ol p.m. 4: 3l p. m. 6: 3o p.m. N - 9:oo a.m. -,l0:30 a.m. 8o 40 3:00 p. m. 30 p.m. 30 p.m. St. Between E Massachusetts Ave. 44 - -4 -6 -9 2l (per hour) 92 2l - ¡8 (per hour) Model One into calling for a p.m. rush hour 00 p. m. These bus volumes provoke curb ìane on lSth Street between N Street and Massachusetts Avenue. Model Two suggests the lane be placed in operation during both the rnorning and evening rush hour periods, and between 8:30 a.m. and 6:30 p.m. on Saturdays. The latter strategy seeks to promote the weekend commercial vítal ity of this area of downtown lJashington. An off-street parkíng lot will be affected by the operation of this bus lane. A cor¡ld be established without severe detrimental impact on "rorrouur the bus lane's operation. P Street between lSth Street and Logan Cîrcle carries G2. No bus lanes are needed for this street segment. only DCT route Below P Street and Dupont Circle, existing bus routes use Connectícut Avenuer 2lst Street,20th Street, and l9th Street as corridors to K Street. These streets will be fortified with bus priority strategies in both Models One and Two. The bus priority strategÌes are of central importance, since they will directly link into the K Street busway and the H Street.bus street ln Models One and Two, routes 02, 04, L4, T2,37, T7, T9 wlll use 20th Street in both directions between P Street and New Hampshire Avenue. ln a southbound direction they will swing right onto New Hampshïre Avenue and then make a left turn at 2lst Street. The buses wlll proceed south on 2lst Street until K Street is reached. ln a northbound direction, these buses will use 20th Street betv'reen K Street and New Hampshire Avenue. Approximate bus volumes over these street segments are as follows: 7 9 0 3 4 6 00 a.m. - 9:00 e.m. 0l a.m. -10:30 a.m. 3l a.m. - 3:00 p. m. Ol p.m. - 4:30 p.m. 3l p.m. - 6:30 p.m. 3l p.m. - 9:00 p.m. North -T3o t6 34 82 t6-t3 South --m38 t6 (per hour) 4t 6l l6-t3 (per hour) �Smï These volumes justify the establishment i nvol ved st reet segments th - of bus priority lanes in 64 the Model One suggests an a.m. rush hour curb lane extending south from P Street to O Street on 20th Street and N Street on New Hampshire Avenue. Right turns would not be allowed at 0 Street or N Street durlng the bus lane's 7 a.m.-9:30 a.m. hours of operation. (R map of the lanes being discussed can be found in Figure 7 of the Appendïx.) No lane would be provided in the short block between N Street and 2lst Street, as buses would need to make a left-hand turn at 2lst Street. The bus lane would again see implementation between M Street and L Street during the a.m. rush period. This second bus lane segment would also be of the curb lane variety. Between L Street and K Street, no bus lane would be provided, as buses, except for route l/, would need to make left turns onto K Street. No parking should be allowed on these street segments between 7 a.m. and 6:30 p.m. Monday-Saturday. Truck dellveries should be allowed at all times other than the a.m. and p.m. rush hours. A substantial number of off-street parking spaces are serviced by 2lst Street south of M Street. Special crossover permits could be considered for these facilities. Model Two would extend the hours of operation of the lanes being discussed to the p.m. weekday rush period. A tïme savîng of bet\^reen l-3 minutes is anticipated for the strategy belng considered. This saving would be in addition to a similar tîme saving generated by the use of Model Twors P Street rush-hour bus street. A bus shelter, complete with heating and I ights, would strengthen the appeal of this bus priority segment and could be located at New Hampshîre Avenue and N St reet. K Street, all bus routes, except route 37, ?resently using 2lst Street proceed southbound make a left-turn and proceed eastbound using K St. Route 37 continues on to Pennsylvania, where it turns east. ln Model One route 37 buses would continue on their present course and no bus lane would be established on the one-block segment of 2lst Street spanning K Street and Pennsylvania Avenue. Bus volumes do not justify such a lane even when consïdering the added impact of Sl a.m. rush hour service over the same street segment. ln Modeì Two, route l/ buses would use the K Street busway and route Sl buses would be rerouted vía l9th Street to the State Department area At to east from 2lst Street, K Street is an eight-lane artery. Four lanes are provided by a center roadway which is bordered by two buffer zones. Beyond the buffer zones are two outside lanes runnîng east and two running west. The outside lanes service many off-street parking faci I ities and a variety of curb activities, incl udïng truck deì iveries. Running priority strategies suggested by both Models One and Two begin Street and extend to l4th Street. No bus lanes are suggested at 20th in eíther model for the one-block segment of K Street spanning 2lst and 20th Streets. At the present time, WM buses reach K Street via the outer lanes from Washington Circle. As previously described, these buses should have gheir routes altered to use the Washington Circle underpass. The bus �Smith - 65 This being the case, bus volumes eastbound between 2lst and 20th Streets on K Street justify the creation of bus priorlty strategies. However, cars and trucks using the l./ashington Circle underpass must be given a chance to circulate to and from local streets. Therefore, no bus priority lane is feasible on K Street west of 20th Street. (The western portion_of the K Street busway is portrayed in Figure / of the Appendîx; Figure 8 of the Appendix contains a representation of the entíre K Street busway. ) 20th Street carries northbound the bus routes conveyed southbound by 2lst street. Again, Model One suggests a rush hour curb bus lane, this time for the weekday p.m. rush. This lane would extend from K Street to N street, and no right turns would be allowed at intersections ìocated along the involved street segment. The lane terminates at N St. in order to provide a right turn capability for other vehicle modes onto New Hampshire Avenue. lt is anticipated this lane would generate a time saving of l-3 mínutes for transit patrons. As on 2lst Street, a substantial amount of off-street parking is served by 20th Street. Crossover permits could be considered for facil ities affected by the laners operation. ln Model Two all buses using 20th Street would make a lefthand turn onto the P street bus street. The operational lane length would again extend from K Street to N Street, but hours of operation would be extended to the a.m. weekday rush hours. An on-street parklng ban would be in effect on the involved segment of 2oth street from 7 a.m.-6:30 p.ffi., Monday-Saturday, but truck deliveries would be permltted durîng all non-rush hours. A short one-block walk would allow patrons using P/21st/20th Street buses to transfer to Metro trains at the forth- circle station. An optional transfer arrangement for transit users would be to transfer modes at K Street and Connecticut Avenue via the Farragut North Station and the K Street busway. coming Dupont these At the present time, lgth Street conveys DCT routes L2 and 49 southbound between Dupont Circle and K Street. The character of this street-curb parki ng permi tted, off-street parki ng faci I i tîes served--makes i t an ideal local feeder street for auto and truck traffic. Therefore both Model One and Two recommend that buses be rerouted off llth Street to Connecticut Avenue. This step should be taken when Metro construction has abated on the Avenue below Dupont Círcle. Lower Connecticut Avenue between Dupont Cïrcle and K Street presently carries a substantial amount of buses, including routes N2, N4,40, \2, 45, Ll, L3, L7, L9, Q5. Curb bus lanes are recommended by both npdelswhen Metro construction has departed from this segment of the Avenue. ln addition to the bus routes already served, rouies L2 and 49 would use this portion of connecticut Avenue. The present a.m. rush period volume exceeds ll0 vehicles southbound, and the evening peak hours witness a sl ightly smal ler vehìcle total northbound. Model One foresees an a.m. rush hour curb lane extending between N Street and K Street. No righthand turns v/ould be aìlowed at any intersection up to and including K Street. Off-street parking fac¡l¡ties are nonexistent over this street segment and thus present no problem. ln a northbound direction, a p.m. �Smi th - 66 rush hour lane is suggested for Connecticut Avenue between K Street and the intersection of lSth/N Streets. No auto or truck right-hand turns would be allowed, except at the intersection of Connecticut Avenue and M Street/Rhode lsland Avenue. ln addîtion, a crossover for taxis would be established at Desales Street ln order to serve the Hayflower Hotel. Bus shelters would satisfy a vïtal need along this portion of Connecticut Avenue in both Models One and Two. pictures an extension of the northbound and southbound lanesr hours of operation to both the mornîng and evening rush periods in both directions. ln addition, the lanes would be in operation from 8:30 a.m.-6:30 p.m. on Saturdays. Again, the commercial vïtal ity of downtown Vlashîngton on weekends is the goal being furthered. (fne lower Connecticut Avenue bus lanes are featured in Fîgure / of the Model Two Append i x. ) Turning to another important corridor to l,lashingtonrs central core, l6th Street between Florida Avenue and Scott Circle is the home of DCT routes sl, 52, 53, s4, s5, 56, Y5,87, Q7, and Q9. As described ln Section I of this report, l6th Street already has bus lanes în operation st retch i ng f rom I St reet to l,/ Street/V St reets . Model s One and Two propose to strengthen the present strategy by banning rush hour right turns by al I vehicles at selected intersections. However, crossover permits for off-street facilities would still be considered on a case by case basís. At the present time approximately ll5 buses use l6th Street southbound above Scott Circle in the a.m. rush period, and ll0 northbound during the p.m. rush. Both Models One and Two offer identical strategies for l6th Street north of Scott Circle. ln both cases a slight extension of present l6th Street bus lanes is suggested. The southbound lane would be in operation durïng the a.m. weekday rush period and the northbound lane in the p.m. rush period. Beginning at Fuller Street, the first segment of the southbound l6th Street bus lane would run to Vl Street. No right turns would be allowed at any intersection along this segment during the laners hours of operation. No bus lane would exist betbreen l,J Street and New Hampshire Avenue. 0ther vehicle modes would need to make right turns onto V Street, U Street, and New Hampshíre Avenue. The lane would continue operation at New Hampshire Avenue and extend to P Street. Again, no right turns would be permitted at intersectíons along this street segment. Crossovers for off-street faci I itles could be establ ished on a case by case bas i s. ln a northbound direction the p.m. rush hour bus lane would begln at 0 Street and run to Carol ine Street. Prohibitíons agaînst rlght turns would be in effect at involved intersections. No lane wouìd exist betureen Caroline Street and tl Street. The lane would be reinstated at W Street and stretch northward to Fuller Street. �Smith - 67 this portion of l6th Street into a rush hour through street, travel tîmes could also improve for autos uslng the remaining lanes of l6th Street. Local traffic which would requïre turnîng movements could not, and should not, be served by l6th street. Thís tiaffic could be adequately served by l5th and lTth streets, neither of whÍch are candidates for transit service. By making listed for l6th Street proceed:under Massachusetts via the scott Circle underpass. ln order to enhance the time savings generated by the use of bus lanes above Scott Circle, an additional lane w¡ll be needed betureen M Street and H Street. Routes usïng this segment of l6th Street southbound have already been listed. In a-' northbound direction, DCT routes E2, E4, E6, G4 also use l6th street between H street and M streets. These four routes then veer off to the northeast via Rhode lsland Avenue. Approximate present bus volumes for lower l6th Street are as follows: The bus routes already Avenue North 7: oo a.m 9:ol a.m l0: 3'l a.m 3: ol p.m 4:31 p.m 6:31 p.m 9 00 - l0: 30 -3 -\ -6 -9 a.m. a .m. 00 p. m. 30 p.m. 30 p.m. 00 p. m. T29 20 38 133 20 - 15 South -TJT28 16 24 34 t6 - lz (per hour) (per hour) Both Models One and rwo recommend an a.m. rush hour curb bus lane running south along l6th Street between M Street and K Street. No turns would be allowed at L Street and no right-hand turn would be allowed at K street during the laners hours of operation. Traffic conditíons between K Street and H Street ârgue agaînst the need for a southbound curb lane over this two-block segment ln Model One a northbound curb lane is planned for l6th Street between street and M street during the p.m. rush hours. No right-hand turn would be allowed for autos or trucks at any involved ¡ntersect¡on including K street. However, a right turn crossover for taxis would be established at K Street. Adequate crossovers for taxis to serve the hotels located along this street segment should also be permitted. H Model Two requires a slightly shorter curb bus lane segment beginning at I street rather than H Street. ln the second model, H Street îs a full-time bus street. Therefore, few cars and trucks would use l6th street between I Street and H street. ln fact, such a low volume is anticipated that it is suggested a taxi stand be established on the west side of the block for improving multi-mode public transportatíon service in the area. Between I Street and M Street, Model Twors l6th Street bus lane would be in operation during both the mornïng and even¡ng rush hours and right-hand turns would be banned except for a taxi right-turn crossover at K Street. Crossovers could also be retained for taxi service to hotels (r¡gure 8'in the Appendix portrays the lower l6th Street bus lanes). �SmÍ th - 68 There are a number of transit corrldors to the cityts core from the north and west which require no bus lanes. Rhode lsland Avenue betv'reen Scott Circle and l4th Street carries routes E2,84, E6, G4, P3 in an eastbound direction and low bus volumes mean no bus lane is needed in either model. Between l4th Street and 9th Street, Rhode lsland Avenue earries these same routes in both ¡lirections. Again, no bus lanes are needed. l3th Street above Logan Circle presently carrîes rush hour routes Bl, Jl, 57, 59. The morning rush hour period wîtnesses 46 buses moving southbound, and the evening rush hour 37 buses traveling north. ln Model One no bus rerouting is attempted and low bus volumes mean no priority lanes are needed. ln Model Two route 89 is rerouted to l4th Street, and routes S/, 59, and Jl are routed to llth and 9th Streets in order to enter the l4th and llth Street bus streets. l3th Street in Model Two becomes an auto/truck street and loses all transit service (see Figure l2 ïn the Appendix). Between Logan Circle and K Street, l3th Street is also served, in addition to t'he lines I isted, by regular route J6 and rush hour route A7, The additional bus volumes do not Justífy bus lanes in Model One where no bus rerouting is attempted. ln Model Two routes J6 and A7 are rerouted to llth and 9th Streets in order to enter the llth Street bus street. l4th Street north of routes !0, 52, 53, 5), 7: oo a.m a.m !:ol l0:31 a.m 3:ol p.m 4:31 p.m 6z3l p.m lsland Avenue ís presently served by DCT 56, 58. Approxímate bus volumes are as follows: Rhode - 9:00 a.m. -10:30 a.m. 3:00 p.m. 4:30 p.m. 6:30 p.m. !:00 p.m. North -3g. 2\ 12 32 48 12-9 South T24 l2 (per hour) 20 35 12-9 (perhour) These volumes do not justify a bus lane in either di ¡:ection and thus Model One makes no bus priority recommendation. ln Model Two route 89 is rerouted to l4th Street from l3th Street. Thís suggestîon adds 9 buses southbound in the a.m. rush and I buses northbound in the p.m. rush. Again, bus volumes do not justify a príority lane. However, in an effort to speed up the total traffic flow on l4th Street, all turns should be banned at intersections between V Street and P Street (including P Street) in the a.m. rush, and between V Street and Wallach Place (including t/al lach Place) in the p.m. rush. This ,strategy of banning aìl turns could also be applied at selected întersections north of Florida Avenue. No northbound bus lane is recornmended for l4th Street between K Street and Rhode lsland Avenue in eíther Model One or Two. Both models, however, suggest the banning of right turns at N Street during the p.m. �Smith - 69 traffic peak. .This"strategy would also be prudent at L Street in the first model. l4th Street would carry very lìttle traffic between Thomas Circle and K Street in the second model, iln"e the l4th Str""i-bus street would end at K street. Therefore, no need is antícïpated for a northbound bus lane on this street segment. weekday In a southbound dî rection, l4th street presently carries, in addition to the routes already lísted, routes E2, E4, E6, G4 between Rhode lsland Avenue and rhomas circle. At this point these four routes veer off l4th Street via Vermont Avenue to l5th Streer, where iÀ;t-p;ceed south to Pennsylvania Avenue. Low bus volumes mean no bus lanes are needed over these segments of Vermont Avenue and l5th Street. However, these same routes add a total of 24 buses to the involved two-block segment of l4th street during the a.m. weekday traffic peak, pushing the 7 a.m.9 a.m. bus volume to over 70 vehicles. Despite thìs volume, no bus lane is recommended because only a one-bloci< segment, Rhode lsland Avenue ¡9 N Street, would be a feasible candîdate for a lane. (A lane leading dîrectly into a traffic circle is considered by this author to be an uhworkable strategy.) , lt is doubted that the time saving which would be generated by this isolated one-block bus lane, about õne minute, merits its establ íshment Model Two foresees a rerouting of lines E2, E4, E6, G4 directly via l4th Street to H Streèt. Howãver, no southbound bus lanes are considered to be necessary between Rhode lsland Avenue and K Street because of the K Street beginning of the lAtfr Street bus street. This strategy insures a low flow of cars, trucks, etc., on this segment of lAtn str"ãi. I lth Street corridor to downtown l,/ashington presently carries only route 60 north of K Street. Rush hour bus volumes are far too low to consider bus lanes on this portion of llth street in Hodel One. Model Two witnessed the rerouting of rush hour routes Jl, s7, 59 to llth Street from l3th Street. This tactic allows ¡3th Sir""i to become a major transitless street catering to other vehiclã modes. (rigr;. i, in the Appendìx portrays all suchrrauto routerrstreet segments suggested by Model Tw9.) lf present route volumes remain unchangeá these route changes will add approximately 28 buses to llth streetis p.m. rush, bringing the evening peakrs total ro 46 buses. An additional J/ buses wíll be conveyed by the street in the northbound morning rush. The DCT Despite these additional buses, Model Two does not suggest bus priority lanes for llth street above K Street. ln this model,-llth Streät betwåen K street and Pennsylvania Avenue becomes a bus-only street, and this move should limit auto traffic on the street north of K Street to local movements. trithout through traffíc clogging the street, buses should be able to move swiftly without the benãiit of bus lanei. ¡2th street north of K Street presently carries DCT routes K4 and K6, in addition to rush hour routes K3, K5, K9, in a northbound dlrection. The evening peak period sees a total of approximately 40 buses moving north over this street segment. Thus, Model One does not recommend á bus prîority lane for l2th Street between K Street and Vermont Avenue. �Smi th - 70 Model Two moves route J6 and P4 to l2th Street north of K Street in order to transform l3th Street into a through auto and truck route. The additional buses bring the proJected p.m. peak volume for this segment of l2th Street to over 65 vehlcles. Thus¡ â P.m. rush bus-only curb lane is suggested between K Street and P Street. No right turns would be allowed to any intersectïon involved in this route segment. Crossover permits to off-street fac¡llt¡es could be consldered on a case by case basis. A time saving of 2-\ minutes for buses is credited to these tacti.cs. Below K Street, routes J6 and P4 would use the llth Street bus street The lOth Street corridor to downtown llashíngton presently carries routes K3, K4, K6, K7, K9 in a southbound directîon. Low bus totals mean no bus lanes are suggested for this segment of lOth Street in Model One. No buses would contïnue to use lOth Street north of K Street în Model Two, as all southbound buses would be rerouted to 9th Street. This model foresees the transformation of lOth Street between Florlda Avenue and G Street into an auto/truck route without transit servíce. is presently a maJor transit corridor to l^tashiñgtonrs CBD. lt carries routes which eventually wind theïr way downtown via l3th, l2th, lOth, and 9th Streets. Among these routes are K4, K6, J6, K3, K7, K9, 47, J3, Jl, Pl, P3, P4. Approximate bus volumes at the Sherman Avenue present time on Sherman Avenue between V Street and New Hampshire Avenue are as follows: 423 a.m. a.m. a.m. p.m. p.m. 6:3 p. m. 7:0 9:0 l0: 3 3:0 - 9:oo - l0:30 - 3:oo - 4:30 - North a.m. a. m. p.m. p.m. 6:30 p. m. 9:00 p. m. T24 13 29 73 13 - lO South T 24 13 (per hour) 27 33 13 - l0 (per hour) These volumes provoke both Models One and Two into calling for bus prior¡ty lanes on Sherman Avenue. Both models suggest a southbound curb lane for the a.m. weekday rush hour, extending from New Hampshlre Avenue to Florida Avenue. No right turns would be allowed at any involved intersection during the lane¡s hours of oper:ation. Again, crossover permits to off-street facilities could be issued on a case by case baiis. ln the northbound direction a p.m. rush hour curb lane would extend from t¡/ Street to Morton Street. No rÏght turns would be allowed at ïntersections crossed by this bus lane. A time savlngs of 2-5 minutes is estimated for buses using the Sherman Avenue bus lanes. most of the buses using Sherman Avenue to proceed south swing onto Vermont Avenue. Therefore, no bus lane is needed in Model One for 9th Street between V Street and R Street. ln Model Two, however, routes K4, K6, J6 would use 9th Street to reach K Street. (ln a northbound direction, as already described, these buses would use l2th Street.) The second model recommends no bus lanes for this portion of 9th Street, but it does suggest that all turns be banned at intersections along this street segment, încluding right turns.at S Street and R Streets. At the present time, �Smith - 7l 9th street corridor to Mt. vernon square presently carries DCT routes Fl, F2, F4, J3, El , F7, Y9, Current bus volumes are nrodest during peak periods and thus Model One contains no plans for bus lanes on 9th Street between Rhode lsland Avenue and Mt. Vernon Place. Model Two advocates the same lack of bus lanes în a northbound direction. However,.as mentioned, th¡s segment of 9th Street would also convey routes K4, K6, J6 in a southbound direction in Model Two. In addïlion, rush hour lines F5 and G7 would be rerouted from 6th Street to 9th street for southbound trips. Thus, the second model foresees an a.m. peak period bus lane occupying the curb lane of 9th Street between R street and L Street. No right turns would be allowed at any intersectïon alonþ the laners length, including Rhode lsland Avenuä and L Street. The al ready fami I iar strategy of ìssuing crossover permits on a case by case merit basis for off-street facilities would again be utilized The 71 , 72, 74 enter downtown t/ashington via the 7th Street transit corridor. Approximate current bus volumes for 7th Street north of Mt. Vernon Place are as follows: Routes 70, 7: oo a.m 9:ol a.m l0: 3l a.m 3:ol 4:3 P;m | P.m 6t3l p.m -9 -10 -3 -4 -6 -9 00 a.m. 3o a.m. 00 p. m. 30 p.m. 30 p. m. 00 p. m. North _lTSouth -T' 17 l2 24 36 12 2l 12 (per hour) 24 3l l2 (per hour) Model Two contains no route additions for this segment of 7th Street. Modest bus volumes during peak periods, thus, lead both models into avoiding advocacy of bus lanes on 7th Street north of Mt. Vernon Place. Another street segment judged to be not in need of bus lanes ín either model is New Jersey Avenue between Florida Avenue and Massachusetts Avenue. Bus volumes generated by routes 91,96, !8 are much too low to merit such lanes. 6ttr Street presently carries rush hour routes Xl, G7, F5,87, Bus volumes are too low to call for bus lanes in Model One. ln Model Two these lines âre rerouted to 9th Street and North capîtol street as 6th street becomes an auto-truck route devoid of transits. ThÌs transitless strategy for 6th street would apply to all its segments north of the Mall.- Running east from 9th Street and west to 7th/R Streets, Rhode lsland Avenue carries a variety of bus routes. lncluded at the present t¡me among these routes are E2, E4, E6, G4, F2, F4, El, Fl, Fg, and to 6th Street F5, 87, G7. Approximate bus volumes for this segment of Rhode lsland Avenue, extending east to llth street N.E., are as follows: �Smi a.m. -9 00 a.m. 0l a.m -10 30 a.m. 3r a.m -3 00 p.m. 0l p.m -4 30 p. m. 3l p.m -6 30 p. m. 3l p.m -9 00 p. m. 7 00 9 0 3 4 6 North Tt7 (east) ,T 8 th 7z South (west) 23 8 24 20 69 3l (per hour) I I (per hour) These relatively"high peak-hour bus volumes stimulate the suggestion of curb rush-hour bus lanes over this segment of Rhode lsland Avenue. ln the westbound (south) a.m. period a bus lane would begin at 4th Street N.E. and extend to Lincoln Road. The lane would then be discontinued for the next one-block segment in order to allow right turns north onto North Capitol Street and U Street. Following thís intersection, the lane would again spring to life and stretch to 3rd Street. Again, it would be interrupted to allow right turns onto Florida Avenue. From Florida Avenue the third lane segment would extend to R Street. No right turns would be allowed at any intersectîon along the segment described except in the two cases listed. This strategy would be used in both Models One and Two. Crossovers would be allowed to off-street facil ities via the case-by-case merit procedure. A time saving of 2'5 minutes ís anticipated for bus patrons traveling over the three Iane segmen ts ln the eastbound (north) dîrection, a p.m. rush hour lane would begin at 9th Street and extend to 5th Street. The lane would be discontlnued for four blocks at this point in order to allow right turns onto New Jersey Avenue, Florida Avenue, and T Street. The T Street turn would serve tr:affic bound for North Capitol Street. At T Street the lane would again be put into operat¡on and extend to V Street. The famil iar strategies of no right turns and merlt crossover permîts would be in etfect in both Models One and Two. A time saving of l-4 minutes is projected for the two segments of the eastbound Rhode lsland Avenue bus lane. 4tn Street, Rhode lsland Avenue is served by DCT Routes 82,84, 86, 88, F5, F7. Present rush hour volumes are not substantial, totaling 43 buses southbound (west) in the a.m. rush, and 38 buses northbound in the evening peak. ln addltion to these modest volumes, it can be anticipated that many patrons nob, using the buses on this street segment will transfer to rapid rail trains at Metro's Rhode lsland Avenue Station. Thus, no bus lanes are advocated for this segment of Rhode lsland Avenue in either Mode'l One or Two. Beyond Most of the bus lines using upper Rhode lsland Avenue, beyond 4th Street N.E wind theír way south to North Capitol Street via 4th/3rdl2ndlT Streets and R Street. No bus lanes are needed on these street segments. North Capitol Street north of R Street carries only DCT Route 80. Low peak bus volumes on this street segmentr 23 a.m. south--22 p.m. north, make bus lanes unnecessary. The same statements apply to North Capltol Street between New York'Avenue/M Street and Massachusetts Avenue. l l �Smi th - 73 Southbound between R Street and New York Avenue and northbound between M Street and Q Street, North Capitol Street is served by routes 80,82, 84, 86, BB. Approximate bus volumes are as follows: 7:oo a.m 9:ol a.m l0 :31 a.m 3: ol p.m 4:31 P.m 6:31 p.m -9 -10 -3 -4 -6 -9 No 00 a. m. 30 a. m. 00 p.m. 30 p. m. 30 p. m. 00 p. m. fth 36 20 12 35 50 12- l0 South >5 30 t2 (per hour) 26 35 t2- l0 (per hour) No bus lanes are suggested for this segment of North Capîtol Street. Bus volumes on the involved street segment fall somewhat short of the total which would provoke such a recommendation. ln addition, bus lanes would interfere with needed turníng movements, via right turns, from North Capitol Street onto New York Avenue and Florida Avenue. north (east) of North Capitol Street presently carries WMA routes T2, T3, T4, T6, Rl, q from Prince Georgers County to downtown Ì,/ashington. Unfortunately, from the standpoìnt of justifying bus lanes, peak hour bus volumes are guíte low, totaling less than 25 buses in both the morning and evening rush periods. A substantial number of Greyhound and Trailway buses also use this portîon of New York Avenue but cannot be considered to be transit vehicles. Traffic conditions on New York Avenue are usually utterly dismal and certainly must adversely affect IJMA patronage. ln this case the report takes what must seem to be an unorthodox stance and reconmends the constructíon of the proposed New York Avenue lndustrial Freeway. The construction of the new road would aid \^/MA travel times and might help to stimulate patronage. However, from a total urban transportation perspective, improved rail commuter servïce via the Penn Central could also serve to unclog New York New York Avenue Avenue. Street and 4th Street, New York Avenue westbound routes just listed and DCT Routes 82, 84, 86, 88. At 4th Street the DCT buses turn south, while the Ì,IMA buses continue on to 7th Street before turning toward the city's core. Both Models One and Two advocate the rerouting of I,JMA buses to 4th Street southbound. Two reasons provoke this suggestîon: I) the sooner tlMA buses depart from New York Avenue, the better; 2) WMA patrons would receíve the benefit of better service to the Municipal Center area. ln an eastbound direction the t,/MA and DCT buses being discussed use New York Avenue between 5th Street and M Street. ln Model Two WMA buses would be rerouted from their present 6th Street northbound home to 5th Street. This step htould be taken to transform 6th Street înto the auto/truck route al ready discussed. Between North Capitol presently conveys the t^/MA �Smi At the present time bus volumes on New York th - 74 Avenue westbound between North Capitol Street and 4th Street and eastbound between 4th Street and M Street are as follows: I'les :00 a.m 9 :01 a.m l0 :31 å.m 9 0 :01 p.m 4 :31 p.m 6 :31 p.m 4 6 9 7 3 3 00 a.m. 30 a.m. 00 p.m. 30 p.m. 30 p. m. 00 p.m. Et 20 t I Eas T l2 t 8 r4 24 (per hour) 23 5l 8-6 8-6(perhour) As in the case of North Capitol Street, these volumes fall somev/hat below the totals which would establish a clear need for bus lanes. to the fact that such lanes would împede right-hand turns for other vehicles onto M Street in both directions, the report must conclude that bus lanes for this segment of New York Avenue cannot be advocated in either model t^lhen added DCT Routes 82,84,86,88 south betureen York Avenue and Massachusetts Avenue/H Street. ln the period preceding Metro construction, these buses continued on to G Street. However, these routes now use H Street to reach Pennsylvanîa in the l,/hite House area. Model Two recommends that these buses continue to use H Street even after G Street is restored. ln this model, G Street would become a street catering to the movement of autos in the downtown area. As already described, Model Two also suggests that 4th Street carry southbound Ì,ll{A buses presently using New York Avenue. Moderate bus volumes and bearable traffic condítions prod both models into not advocating any bus lane for 4th Street between New York Avenue and 4tfr Street preseritly carríes New H St reet. The same statements made for 4th Street also apply to 5th Street, which presentìy conveys DCT Routes 82-88 northbound between H Street and New York Avenue. The rerouting of tlMA buses to 5th Street is recommended ín Model Two, but neither model calls for bus lanes on thís street segment. Having explored the possibi I itîes for bus priority strategies on transit corridors to \,/ashingtonts core from the west and north, th¡s report now turns to transit routes entering from the east and south. Pennsylvania Avenue S.E. and l4th Street are by far the most heavily utilized transit corridors from these two directions. In general, other streets only have moderate or I ight bus volumes. DCT Routes D2 and D4 enter the Union Station Plaza via F Street N.E., having been conveyed from lvy City via 4th/6th Streets N.E. and K Street N.E. Low peak volumes, 25-30 buses in both directions during the a.m. and p.m. weekday rush hours, and lack of traffíc congestion mean no bus lanes are suggested for any of these street segments in either Model One or Two. �Smi th - 75 Street N.E. conveys only DCT Route 4O ¡n an eastbound direction at the present time. Low bus volumes at peak hours mean no bus lane can be justified on this street. tlestbound Route 40 buses use C Street N.E. to ?each Massachusetts Avenue. C Street also carries VlltlA Route A and F buses to Maryland Avenue. Still, â.fi. peak period bus volumes are below 30 vehicles and no bus priority lanes can be justified by this report for the involved street segment. The l,lHA buses presently using C btreet travel westbound to Constitutîon Avenue via Maryland Avenue. No bus lanes are needed over this street segment in Model 0ne. ln Model Two, these t/MA buses will need to be reroutedo since Constitution Avenue becomes an auto route devoid of transít. Thus, westbound A and F buses in the second model will use Massachusetts Avenue to reach D Street. They will then be carried to the cityrs CBD vîa D Street. D Eastbound I^IMA A and F buses use 2nd Street to reach lndependence Avenue S.E. No bus lanes are suggested fôr the Avenue because of low bus volumes. ln Model Two,2nd Street becomes an auto route and thus l,lMA transit service must be rerouted. The model suggests A and F buses use D Street to reach Massachusetts Avenue and then turn south on 4th Street S.E. to lndependence Avenue. No bus lanes are needed over these street segments. Massachusetts Avenue between Union Station Plaza and C and D Streets N.E. is served by route 42. Again, low bus volumes mean no bus lanes can be suggested. Stfi Street S.E.-N.E. north of Pennsylvania Avenue is the home of ioutes 92 and !4, but modest bus volumes exempt the street segment from bus lane recommendations. Constitution Avenue east of 2nd Street carries rush hour routes X7, Xg, 43. No bus lanes are recommended by Model gne and Model Two reroutes these buses to East Capitol Street. Stfr Street S.E. between Pennsylvanîa Avenue and Virginia Avenue is Moderate bus volumes, less served by DCT Routes 91,92,9\,52,5\. than 40 vehicles per direction per peak period, and reasonable traffïc conditions lead both rnodeìs into avoiding bus lanes for this street segmen t East Capitol Street is the home of DCT Route 40 and rush hour Route U5. Present peak direction and period bus volumes are not high enough (below 40 buses per peak) to Justify bus I anes in Model One. ln I'lodel Two, East Capitol Street will receive routes X7, X9, A3 from Constitution Avenue. lf present bus volumes are in effect, this route change wïll bring the number of buses usíng East Capitol Street westbound în the a.m. rush to approiimately 47 vehicies. ln the eastbound p.m. peak, the total would be approximatelY 47 vehicles. These volumes are not quite hïgh enough to recommend bus lanes. However, bus priority strategies on lst Street în Model Two wiìl cut off turnîng movements from this street and thus, control the number of autos using East Capitol Street eastbound during the p.m. rush. A unique strategy is suggested by the second model to control the a.m. rush westbound flow of auto traffic on this street segment. No right turns would be allowed onto East Capitol Street from llth Street at Lincoln Park 7:00 a.m.-9:30 a.m. weekdays. l,/ith auto flows choked off at key entry points, East Capitol Street between lst Street and llth Street should provide swift trips for transît pat rons �Smlth - 76 of the capitol r Znd street presently carries a vâriety of l,tMA routes north to Cänstitution, where they-turn left and enter C' -inãiuà"¿ in the ¡IMA routes using 2nd Street are B, the city's core.' a9!u?l K, H, J, and R. Oespiie the ìarge number of routes' thevehicle number totals nroderate and of buses conveyed in the a.m. p"ãf is onlyno bus lanes are suggested One ã; ñ-;"""r' l*ó. Therefore, in Model iÀr Zn¿ Street between Pennsylvania Avenue and Constitution Avenue' from Auto flow would bã ebbed, however, bY prohibiting right turns one block east a'm' Cennsylvania nveÁue north onto 2ná Street from 7:00 a'm'-9:30 l'lMA an auto route and weekdays. ln Moiel Two, 2nd Street becomes iervicå would be moved to lst Street' and lst are needed on Constitution Avenue between 3rdremoval of witnesses the St reet N. E. i n Ì'lodel one. The second model all transit service from Constitution Avenue is lst street between union station Plaza and D streetbus currently used lanes are no uy ocr Routes 91,92,94t 37,38, Ml' However, model because it directly suggested for thís-one-bíock-segm"nt in either ln addition' connects with the complex circuiation patterns of the Plaza' for the front no additional bus priärity strategies are-suggested bus service entrance area of Union Station. Þresent lanãi for taxi and prlme at This goal must remain ,are intended to service rail patrons. No bus lanes Union Station. statïon Bus shelters complete with heat and lights are vital at.union and will This location is, and should be provided as roon ", pottibl". ln 1974 transfers become even more so, a major-modal transfer point. at Union Station.and thus buses will occur between trains,-M;ii", "nã ,*i u" gr"n.ud the comforr and convenience .: rn"lrers. ;;; ;ïron, Street and Const¡tution Avenue, -lst Street is currently served operation by DCT roures li,-lA, Ml, gl , 96, 98, 40.(Route Ml is not inthis two-block bus volumes over during peak hours). Approximate ].urh hout street segment are as fol lows: Between D 7:00 a 4:30 p m m - North 9:00 a.m. 6:30 p.m. T38 South T 52 the recommendaDespite bus totals below levels normally utilÌzed forfor this particular gne wi I I suggeåt such lanes tion of bus tanesl llã¿ãl street segment. There are two reasoñi for this decision' First, toì/'n ãà.ããit¡ãñ at this point has an especial ly severe impact on across !l transit travel , as ¡t impinges on th" approxi.mate middle of routes ' desi rable ;6;";ä; lröl'-iå"ona, it is Station into' speed transit service in this order to stïmulate train/bus it"r Union to corridor "oa a P.m. rush hour curb transfers. Thus, Model one recommendsStreet and Constitutionbus lane Avenue' iunning south on'lst Street between D only between ln the morning a curb bus lane would be established �Smith - 77 Constitution Avenue and C Streets (Route 40 buses turn left at D Street). Bus shelters would be quíte desirable, given the presence-of'the Senate Oifice Buildïngs. Because of the present moderate bus volumes' these lst Street lanes could perhaps be made available to taxîs. Bus routes using this portion of lst Street would be altered in Model Two. Routes 37 and 38 would no longer use the segment because-of use Constitution Avenuers auto route status. These two routes would using D Street to reach the city's core. However' t'rMA buses presently journey ãnã Street northbound would be moved to ìst Street for their I'JMA buses using of the ú"t*""n Pennsylvania Avenue and D street. Mostjourney i nto l'lash i ngtonrs for tÀu northbound port íon of thei r 2nd St reet cBD use 3rd street N.\,r. for their return Journey. ln Model Tuo, these return trïps would be routed via D Street to lst Street. 3rd Street becomes an auto route and VJMA patrons are given better s.ervice and in mind, swifter trips via this tactic. Keeping these route changes suggested Model Two adopts without change the bus priority strategies Uy-llo¿"I one for lst Street between D Street and Constitution Avenue. Between Constitution Avenue and East Capitol Street, lst Street presently is served by routes 91,96,98, Ml, M3, 49, Ll. The same routes' except iãr' ,.out" 4ö, wh ich luins out East Capi tol Street r .usê the street between East Capitol Street and Pennsylvania Avenue. ln addition, rush hour route u5 is conveyed over the second street segment Moderate peak bus volumes on the one-block segment of lst Street south gne' lanes in oi f"tt Capitol Street dictate the lack of buslst StreetModel East Capitol onto right turns would be allowed from no*uu"r, nä lr,ôo p.;.-6:30 p.m., Monday-Frld"y: A curb bus would extend ;ir;"; from East Capitol SIreet tá Constitution Avenuq qYring-the.a.m. weekday to the p"ãù. No such lane would exist in a southbound dîrection due street. need for a left-hand turn by route 40 buses onto East Capitol Right-hand turns for autos would be banned at Maryland Avenue and Coñstitution Avehue during the northbound lane's hours of operation. However, a crossover for laxis should be allowed at Maryland Avenue' ln addii¡on, consideration should be gïven to allowing taxis to use this bus lane in Model One. Model Two, \.lMA buses presently using 2nd Street and 3rd Street wil I be conveyed, north and south, by lst -street between Pennsylvania Avenue and Consiitutîon Avenue. Ali turnt from lst Street onto East Capitol a.m. and p.m. peak periods. iireet w¡ll be banned in Hodel Two durîng the Avenue north onto lst by autos from Pennsylvania ln addition, turns nor Sir".t r"roulá not be al lowed during the a.m. peak, p.m.would turns be pe9k.' A northAvenue during the áilãr,ãa iàutf, from Constitution be in operation during the a.m' peak between bound curb land would bus left P;;;tylvania Avénue and Constitution Avenue. The need forp.m. peak. lane would be in operation during the turns means n" iu"f, However, the banning of turns from Const¡tution Avenue should protect transit trip times. Unlike Model One, taxis would be denied the use of Model Twð's a,m. rush hour bus lane for this street segment' ln �Smi th 78 Running between Union Station and the cityrs core, DCT Routes D2 and D4 presently use E street between union station Plaza and 3rd street' l{oderate'peak-hour bus volumes allow Model One to avoid bus lane recommendations for this street segment. ln Model Two, these .l lnes wîl I be rerouted and use Louísiana Avenue to reach their new D Street home. This step is taken to allow E Street to become a downtown auto street devoid oî transît service. No bus lanes will be needed on Louisiana Avenue in the second model D Street presently is served by route 40 between lst Street and 3rd Street N.ruJ. Low bus volumes mean no bus lanes are needed in Model One. In Model Two, routes 37 and 38 switch to D Street from Constitution Avenue; Routes D2 and D4 use D Street west of Louisiana Avenue; a variety of hlMA routes, including A, B, C, H, | , J, K are rerouted to D Street from theÎr already discussed routes. D Street becomes, in Model Two, a major transit corridor to l'Jashington!s core ln keeping with this new important transit status, D Street receives, in the seãond model, curb bus lanes in both east and west directions, stretching between Delaware Avenue and 3rd Street. These lanes, in both direãtions, would be în operation during both the a.m. and p.m. weekday rush periods. ln addition, all curb parkïng would be b.anned from this segment of D Street at all times. No turns for auto/trucks/taxls would be allówed at any intersection between, and including, Delaurare I Avenue and 3r.l Street during the lanes hours of operatlon. t'lhat is being offered is a strategy which stops Just short of turning D Street into a bus street. Time savings of between 2'5 ninutes are projected for buses using the new D Street "transitwayrr. Crossovers to off-street facilities shoúld be permitted only in cases where extreme need is proven. Auto service to this area would be provided by the E Street auto street' C Street, and Constitution Avenue Model Two removes transit service from Constitution Avenue between lst Street and Pennsylvanîa Avenue. However' at the present time this street segment is served by DCT routes 37r 38, Ll, X7, X9. ln addition, a variety of I^/MA buses use the Avenue in a westbound direction. Approximate present peak period bus volumes over this street segment are as follows: 7:00 4:30 a. m. p.m. - 9:00 a.m. - 6:30 p.m. t -,îr l,Jes 4o Eas T t 27 The above totaìs graphically po¡nt out that no bus lane can be Justified eastbound on Constitutîon Avenue betvreen Pennsyìvania Avenue and lst Street. However, Model One does suggest a westbound curb bus lane for rhe a.m. peak (7:oo a.m. - 9:30 a.m.). This lane would begin at lst Street and stretch across the intersection of Delaware Avenue, where no right turn from Const¡tution Avenue would be permitted. At a point 150 fãet to the east of New Jersey Avenue, the lane would be discontinued in order to allow right turns by other vehicle modes north onto New Jersey �Smi th - 79 Avenue. The lane would again be established following this intersection and extend to John Marshall Place. No right-hand turns would be al lowed at any învolved intersectíon including Jrd Street. A time saving of l-4 minutes is projected for this bus prtority strategy. No bus lanes are suggested in either model for the one-block segment of Massachusetts Avenue between Union Station Plaza and North Capitol Street. Despite service by routes 91, 96, 98, 42, bus lanes would be unfeasible if they connected directly with the complex traffic ci rculation patterns of the Plaza. ln addition, neît her model recommends bus lanes for Massachusetts Avenue betr^reen North apitol Street and H Street. A number of bus routes, including 80, 9l , 96, 98, \2 use portions of this avenue segment. However, the need for various bus turnlng nrcvements would preclude any bus lane segments more than one block in length. This report judges such short segments to be unproductive in terms of the small benefits whích would be gained by buses. G street between Massachusetts Avenue and 4th Street is also not a candidate for bus lanes in either model, because of rnoderate bus volumes. H Street east of, Massachusetts Avenue is served by a substantial volume of buses. lncluded in the routes which use H Street between Massachusetts Avenue and Florica Avenue/Benning Road are V2, V4, V6, V8, X2, Xl, X5. Approxímate present bus volumes for various tlmes of C the day are as fol lows: 7: oo a.m 9:01 a.m l0: 3l a.m 3 :01 p.m 4t3l p.m 6r3t p.m -9 -10 -3 -4 -6 -9 Eas 00 a. m. 30 a.m. T t l,Jes t TT 38 39 00 p. m. t7 30 p.m. 30 p. m. 17 (per hour) 46 87 46 00 p.m. 17 - r4 l7 78 - 14 (per hour) figures show that H street east of Massachusetts Avenue is a prime candidate for bus lanes. ln both Models One and Two, a curb bus lane begins at l4th Street N.E. and extends west across the intersectïon at 9th Street. At this point the lane is discontinued for one block to allow right-hand turns north onto 8th Street. Springing back to life, the laners second segment extends for 8th street to a point 150 feet east of North capitol Street. Here again other vehicles would be allowed to enter the curb lane for turns north onto North Capîtol Street. Only one lane crossover is recommended for the two lane segments just described. This crossover would be establîshed at 3rd Street. R¡ght turns would not be permïtted at other intersectïons during the lane's hours of operation. These Both models díscontinue bus lanes to provide right turn capabi I ities a substantial number of such turns are anticipated, and are vital to overall area traffic circulation. ln cases where less turnïng movements are projected but turns are stlll important to overall traffic when círculation, â crossover îs the recommended strategy. �Smith - 80 Continuing eastward on H Street, buses would agaîn benefit from the third segment of the bus lane being discussed, after proceeding through the North Capitol Street intersectîon. This segment would extend only one block to lst Street, where right turns would be prohibited. The lane would again make way for right-hand turns, th¡s tìme north onto New Jersey Avenue. The fourth and final segment would stretch between New Jersey Avenue and 4th Street, with no right turns being al lowed at 3rd Street ln Model One, the H Street westbound lane would only be in operation during the a.m. peak period. ln Model Two, the lane would be Ìn operaiion during both the mornîng and evening weekday rush peaks. ln both models, crossovers to off-street faci I ities would be considered but discouraged in cases not proving extreme need. A time saving of 3-8 minutes is anticipated for bus patrons using the entire lllth Street N.E. to 4th Street N.\,J. length of the bus lane. Bus shelters would greatly enhance the transit trips of the users of this heavily patronized transit corridor and are strongly recommended. ln an eastbound directîon, an H Street curb bus lane would begin at 3rd Street N.t^J. and run past the intersection of 7th Street N.E. At ifris point, the lane wouid vanish for a block, al lowing right turns south onto 8th Street. Along this lengthy bus lane segment, rlght turn crossovers would be established at North Capitol Street and 3rd Street. The second lane segment would run from 8th Street to l3th Street, with a right turn crossover provided at I lth Street N.E. As in the case of the westbound lane, Model Oners eastbound lane would only be in operation during one peak period, in this case the p.m. rush hours. Modei Twors eastbound lane would operate during the rnornìng and evening rush hours. The same policy with respect to crossovers to off-street facîlities would be in effect, i.e., in cases of proven vital need. A time savings of 3-8 minutes is again anticípated. t rans i-t corr idors to VJash i ngtonrs core f rom the south , Pennsyivania Avenue between l4th Street S.E. and Bth Street S.E. îs t"ruuå by DCT Routes 30, 32, 3\, 36, 39, 96, t8 and a variety of l,lMA I ines, iñcluding Routes B, C, G, H, J, K, R. Betbreen 8th Street and 2nd Street S.8., DCT Transit Routes 52 and 54 ioin the línes just I i sted i n us i ng lower Pennsyl vani a Avenue. Approximate bus vol umes on Pennsvlvania Avenue betureen Stfr Street and 2nd Street S.E. are as follows: (Volumes for Pennsylvania Avenue between Btfl Street and l4th Street S.E. are somewhat lower but sti I I substantîal.) Turn i ng to 7:oo a.m 9:ol l0:31 3: ol 4:31 6:31 a.m a.m p.m p.m p.m - North (west) 9:oo a.m. - l0: 30 a. m. - 3:00 p. m. 30 p.m. -4 -6 -9 30 P. m. 00 p.m. South (ua st) 122 4¡ 23 7l 43 69 t+z 23-17 38 23 il3 23 (per hour) - l7 (per hour) �Smíth - 8t ln light of such heavy bus volumes, lower Pennsylvania can be descrîbed as a major transit corridor into downtown Washington. rhereiore, both models.strongly recommend bus lanes for the Avenue between l4ir¡ street s.E. and 2nd Street S.E. ln a northbound (west) direction, a curb bus lane would be beginning at l4th Street S.E. and extending to 9th Street.established At this point the lane would be interrupted in ordãr io-piouiåã-iigr,i-hana turns north onto 8th and /th streets. No right-hand tlrns permitted -ll-uo¿el at other involved intersections along [hîs l"n" i"gr";i: "ouia"l" gne, the lane would operate only during tñe iusr, rrðurs, wrriìe the second ".r. model would see the lane servîng transit duríng both the evening transit peaks. The s.tandard pol ícy of al lowing morning and off-street facílities in cases of vital nuåd unould alrõ be in effect. "iãrrovers to Following 7th street, the second segment of the westbound lane would act as an aid to transit. rt would run to 4th Street, where no iigñt turns would be perm¡tted. The second at point, allowing northbound circurationsegment would terminate andthis fiom the Avenue to irJ 2nd Streets' The third segment of lower Pennsylvania Avenuers westbound "il bus tane wourd rhen srrerch from 2nd street t" irt'ð;;;r. in rhe case of rhe first rane segment,_the hours of operati;"-i;; seiments two and three would be 7:00 a.m.-9i30 a.*. *""ra"yr in Moder One. rn second model , the lane wourd operate during båth trre a.m: -"iå p.r. the peak periods. ln an eastbound direction, lower Pennsylvania Avenue,s bus lane should besin at rsr Street and have a firsr sågment of 7th street. At this point the lane ñould be inrer;u;ied-ior a brief "it"iJinõ i.-riõ"i"et west dístance in order to al.low right turns onto 7th anã gth-iri"åt.. Following 8th street, the secõnd segment rouiJ extend through the section of lOth street. Again, a discontinuatlon ís recommended interto service right-hand turns sãutn onto llth strã"t. The laners third segment is foreseen for the Avenue segment between llth Street and Potomac Avenue. Following the tactical pattern of the westbound lane, p.m. day peak period duratlg! of operarion is sulg"stea in only aOne. weekModel The second plan suggests life for the lane in uã[n t¡t. rorniiã'.iä-"uening weekdav traffic peaks. The already famillar policy of overs to off-street facilities in cases of exireme needgl;r;ï;9 crossin effect. A time saving of 3-9 mínutes is anticipated would also be in both directions. M Street s.t/. between 8th street S.E. and Delaware Avenue is presently served by routes v4 and v6. Low bus volumes mean no bus l"n"!'"r" needed over this street segment. However, th¡; report does change in the route structure of these twó roules in Model suggest a rwo] currently, v4 and v6 buses terminate the¡r runs at the gr.""u-åf Engraving at c street s.l,/. This is an inconvenient terminal point t'ansfer for v4, v6 patrons wishing to enter the ciiy core norih of " "nã-rã."", the Mall. Therefore.this reportrs second moaeì suggests that those routes be combined with routes F2 and F4. patrons-õf all four-present �Smi th 8z lines would receive better through-trip transportation via thîs combination. ln order to achieve the merglng of the involved routes, iãir"r V4 and V6 buses would enter the CBD vla 7th Street. Subst¡tute bus service to the Sll bus terminal now served by routes V4 and V6 will be discussed in a forthcoming section of this report. South of M Street portîons of 4th Street, Delaware Avenue, and P Street are served by a limited number of route 70r 72, /4 buses, as well as ioutes 71, Ri, M2. Modest bus volumes mean no bus lanes are needed on any of these itreet segments. Low bus volumes also preclude the need for bus lanes on 3rd Sireet. S.t^r. between M Street and I Street between ' and Street between 3rd Street and 4th Street. 4th Street S.E. on t lou I Street and E Street is served by routes M2' 60, and R5, but-again of bus volumes make special lanes for transit undeslrable. Low Ievels Street S.E. traffic congestion'combined wíth moderate bus totals also takd Mcontending between Delaware Avenue and 6th Street off the list of segments for bus lanes. 6th Street between M Street and I Street, I Street between 6th Street and 7th Street, and 7th Street between lstreet and E Street S.l'1. are street segments served by routes v4 and v6, as well as a llmited number of 70, 7l-r 72,74 buses. Again, the theme offered is no suggested bus lanes'becåuse of moderate tiansit vehicle volumes and bearable levels of traffic. The Southwest Freeway carries DCT rush hour routes 15, 17, 19. No bus lanes, however, are suggested for this facil ity. The South Capitol Street bridge is a facility prone to high levels of peak hour congestion. This bridge and the segment_of South Capitol itreet lying below the Southwest Freeway convey DCT rush hour routes 45, 49, þ9,-and IJMA routes D, S, l, and !J. Peak hour bus volumes over this bridge and its connecting segment of South Capitol Street are as fol lows: 7:00 a.m 4:30 p.m - 9:00 a.m. - 6:30 p.m. No rth ---ñ- South -Tõ'- 9 Despite the fairly substantial number of peak hour buse: uslng the Oouitas Bridge at the present time, ¡t is difficult to imagine a bridge i;|! b"ing ¿ãaicated fär rush hour transit use, given the lÍmited lane capacity õf the span. Thus, Model One cannot recommend such a strategy. Such a lane would be feasible if bus volumes could be increased significantly. A lane would also be made avaÎlable if the Douglas Bridge waã made a one-r^,ay facility during peak hours of congestion._ ltlodel Two, however, does not call for any bus rerouting to South Capitol Street and canÁot take a strong advocacy stance in favor of the one-uray strategy. Therefore, the second *odul.also does not suggest a bus lane on the bridge. in addition, neither model advocates bus lanes for South Capitol Street between the Dóuglas Bridge and the Southwest Freeway. Byt lanes are also not viewed as a practical strategy for the hïgh speed lanes siretching between the freeway and C and D Streets S.Ur. �Smith 83 is currently the home of DCT routes Al , A2, 43, 15, 17, 19. Approxlmate present bus vo I umes on 44, A6, A8, 92, 94, the span are as follows: The Anacostia Bridge 7:oo a.m 9:ol l0: 3 3:0 4:3 6:3 a.m a.m p.m p.m p.m -9 -10 -3 -4 -6 -9 North 00 a.m. 30 a.m. T South -T l8 20 00 p. m. l2 12 30 p.m. 30 p.m. 00 p.m. 22 29 37 12 - 59 t0 12 ' l0 (per hour) (per hour) These volumes are only slightly greater than those found on the Douglas Bridge ín peak periods. However, the presence of more lane capacity on the twin span llth Street Bridge leads both Models One and Two into calling for an a.m. weekday bus lane on the northbound span. This lane would occupy the east curb ìane and thus would not interfere with traffic bound for the Southwest Freeway. No southbound lane ïs suggested for the evening rush period due to tv'ro constraints: Fi rst, the number of evening rush hour southbound buses is approximately l47^ less than the morningrs total. Second, the buses would have to v.reave across lanes of traffic to enter the east lane, which is the most logical choice for transit use. Use of the west curb lane would block auto flow to the Anacostia Freeway. of the Anacostia Bridge no bus lanes are suggested for the very short segments of llth and l2th Streets used by transit vehicles below M Street S.E. The same restraint is shown for M Street between llth and l2th Streets. ln addition, no bus lanes are suggested for Virgînîa Avenue, whích carries routes Al-48 eastbound, between 3rd Street and llth Street, or I lth Street which serves northbound buses between M Street and I Street North ln keeping with the concept of establíshing systems of bus lanes, a westbound curb lane is suggested for I Street S.E. between llth Street and 8th Street S.Ì,1e. This lane would operate ïn both Models One and Two only duríng the a.m. peak perìod. No right turns would be allowed at any intersection along this three-block segment. No lane is suggested between 8th and 7th Streets, in order to give other vehîcles the opportunity to turn right north onto 7th Street. ln typical fashion, crossovers to off-street facilities would be established in cases of proven need. Buses traveling westbound on I Street are again given the benefit of a bus lane on Virgînia Avenue between 7th Street and 4tfr Streets S.E. This segment would again only operate during the a.m. weekday peak períods and all other operational condltions follow the pattern of the I Street segment. The purpose of these two lane segments ls to protect tlme saved by the Anacostia Bridge a.m. northbound bus lane. The total time saving anticipated for the bridge lane and its reinforcing lanes on I Street and Virginia Avenue is 2-6 minutes. �Smi th 84 No bus lanes are recommended for the short segment of 3rd Street S.E. between Virginia Avenue and E Street. The need for bus left-hand turns and the minute length of the involved street segment urould make Such I anes s upe rf I uous . Routes Al-AB use E Street between 3rd Street S.E. and Canal Street. No bus lane is advocated by either model for buses traveling eastbound over this street segment. Al-48 buses traveling westbound would receîve the benefit of one last a.m. curb lane segment between 3rd Street and New Jersey Avenue/North Carolina Avenue. No lane îs suggested between this intersection and Canal Street because of an anticîpated overly disruptive effect on area traffic flow. ln addition, no bus lanes'are suggested for Canal Street between E Street and C Street S.l^1. last transit corridor to l^/ashingtonrs core to be covered ïn this report is l4th Street north of the l-95 bridges. Thîs street segment connects directly with lanes presently reserved for buses on the bridgets neh/ center span. These bridge lanes, in turn, connect directly with the Shirley Hlghway Busway. lt is important that reserved bus lanes be maintaíned óver'the Potomac Ìn the future to ïnsure the continued The success of the Shirley Highway bus strategy. At the present time, as dïscussed in the first section of this report, l4th Street has a southbound bus lane extending from Pennsylvania Avenue to C Street S.tJ. Both Models One and Two retain this curb lane with certaîn modifications. First, the weekday p.m. peak perlod hours of operation would be 4:00-6:30 Þ.m. second, the lane would be discôntinued betbreen Jefferson Drive and lndependence Avenue in order to allow ríght turns by other vehicle modes onto the Avenue. Third, no ríght-hañd turns would be allowed at any other involved intersection while the lane is in operation. This ban includes right turns onto Constítution Avenue and Madison Drlve. Thus the lane would be transformed into a bus-only facility and enforcement would be facilitated. ln a northbound direction, l4th Street presently has a bus.lane stretching f r.om C Street S.t/. to H Street N.\1. Model One (Figure ll in the Appendix) accepts this bus priority strategy with certain modifîcations. Model Two (Figure l0 in the Appendix) abol ishes this lane and suggests a major change: the rerouting of northbound bus movements tó-lZtn Streãt, where bus lanes would be established. the northbound l4th Street bus lane would operate from 7:00-9:30 a.m. on weekdays. lnstead of a C Street S.l{. start' ît is recommended the lane begin immediately following the intersection of l4th Street and lndepenãence Avenue. This would allow cars and other vehicle modes to make a right-hand turn eastbound onto the Avenue. Model oners northbound lane would have two segñents, the first extending from lndependence Avenue to a point 200 feet north of the ïntersection of l4th Slreet and Constitutîon Avenue. No right turns would be alìowed during the laners hours of operation at Jefferson Place, Adams Place, or Coñstitution Avenue. The lane interruptlon is suggested to allow ln Model 9ne, �Smí th - 85 access to the huge parking lot located north of the Department of Labor and right turns onto E Street. Model 0ners suggestions for l4th Street between E Street and K Street will be discussed shortly în conjunction with an exploratïon of this reportrs bus priorlty recommendations for the central core of lJashington. off l4th Street northbound for a number of major reasons. Of central importance is the fact that thîs model seeks to minimize interfèrence of buses by other vehicle modes while providing viable routes for these other modes in the downtown area. l4th Street is a major entrance to V/ashington from the south and cars and trucks must be able to flow from the l-95 bridges to other major auto routes established by the second model. Therefore a large number of rîght-hand Model Two reroutes buses turns by cars, buses, and trucks from lAttr Street eastbound onto Const¡tutìon Avenue, lndependence Avenue, and E Street must be anticipated. Indeed, vehicles will have to turn off l4th Street because the thoroughfare will be transformed into a full-time bus street between Pennsylvania Avenue and K Street. A bus lane would block these turning movements or, vice versa, the turning movements would ímpede the operation of the bus lane. Therefore the mãst practical sol utîon, from the standpoint of this report, is the reroutïng of bus service, in thîs case, to l2th Street. ln additîon, Model Two notes the existence of the large parkïng lot north of the Labor Department. lt would be rational to transform this lot ínto a multi-level facility in order to conserve the amount of land devoted to a necessary evil, the storage of at least some cârs. A bus lane on l4th Street would impede access to this facility. A third factor is the anticipated transformation of l3th Street Ìnto an auto route. A connecting street segment could be constructed, and is recommended, between l3th Street and l4th Street. This segment would be built under or through the multi-level parking facility discussed in the preceding paragraph. Buses presently using l4th Street to reach destinations north of the Mall would reach l2th Street via C Street. Between l3th Street SVJ and l4th Street, C Street is presently one-way westbound. The two-block segment between l2th and l4th Streets is served by DCT Routes 50, 53, V4, V6, X7, V5, l+5. ln addition a substantial number of AB¿t/ buses, includîng vehicles from Routes ll, 12,13, 14, 15, l6 use C Street to reach lAth Street. Rush hour congestion on C Street during the evening peak period is largely a function of traffic condîtions on l4th Street. north side curb bus lane is recommended for C in Model One. DC Transït bus stops occupy much of the available curb space west of l3th Street and act as a de'facto bus lane. Four addítional lanes are available for turning movements onto l4th Street, and the southside curb lane is currently occupied by vehicles parked at approximately l5 metered parking spaces. Model One recommends that no parking be allowed on the southside curb lane between 4:00 p.m. and 6:10 p.m. Monday-Friday. This lane would be reserved for ABEI^I buses seeking to make a left turn onto l4th Street. This would allow ABet, buses to proceed through the traffîc signal at C Street and l4th Street at a swifter average rate than other vehicles. No �Smïth - 86 ';;r;;l-uåi*""n l3th Street and l4th ModelTwoforeseesafardifferentarrangementforcstreetbetween and iÁ¡., s..""r. c t2th srreer Streetwouldbecomeatwo-waystreetsegmentandbeequippedwitheastthã change contemplated for C Street bound bus lanes.- The full ""t.nl-ãi description will be discussed shortly in "oi¡-rn"tion.with a complete by t"lodel Two' Washington of the bus priority system propoãed for downtown Alltransitapproachestot,lashington.scorehavenowbeencovered. to the bus priortty strategies This report will-nów turn ftr.h";;i ãf our Nationrs bapital bv Models "ii"iiiån susgesred for tÅe'låtÃãri¡"1 these. strategies to the reader one and Two. rr,ã mãtrrod of pres.nt¡ng Th: methód used in the forewi r r be artered in ir.," forthcomi;;-;;õ";. l""r-to.d¡r"urr"it'.,ã-i""otttndations of both models for going discuss¡on, ii ir hoped this procedure allowed each street segment simultaneorrrv.- io.. tr"nsit corridor to the the reader to compare the rugg"riïån, """|t CBD in a convenient manner However,itisimportant-that.theconceptsofbothmodelsfortheCBD Ult priority.strategl::,for Model be viewed as a system. fherefoiã "ii ì U"' fol lowed by an exploration 6ne wil I be dir.lErå¿ f i rst. fiit-;if Two's core system. äi-,'iå' ,.i"t"g ¡ ã, ,ugg.sted by Model conclusions as to the difference able to ln order that the reader befotiãttl form bri.ef description of the between the two conceptual "-u"ty ilodel rwo makes use second model'è centraì strateg; !t'n9* 1rie19a'area' These streets of a series of bus-only streetl in the downtown hours a day' 7 davs a 24 would be off l¡ãitr-lo'the pri;"i;;;l.mobile witness only a f ractlon of week. However, many of these h;;;r-;;ld Bus. Streets and Busways' peak hour tran!ii vårricle totaii on these week rnost of these bus facil iThus, during a majority of. the'ftoiit-in-" goods and taxis for ties could be useã by trucks for-ihe delivery of ities would be open thä facil additionat publ ic transportati;;.- Ãli-of fire engines, and police to emergency vehicles, sugf "r-"iuut"nces, basis. The reader can vehicles, on emergency calls on-a-iull-time åf puulic safetv bv havins appreciate the ;;î;;-;"¡; ¡n tüu-rå"ir in hours of peak congestlon' ,nLiogg"¿ ,orru|"åp"n"'?ãi tr"rt"""f'ti"l"t lowing of Bus Streets and Busways consists of the fol Ilodel Twors system street segments: l) Street between 20th Street BuswaY: the four center lanes of K Street and lAth Street' 2) H 3) 4) K for transit Street Bus Street: all,of H Street reserved u..r"ãn-l7th Street and l4th Street' use l4thstreetBusstreet:allofl4thstreetreservedfortransit ,r. uãi"åen K Street and Pennsylvanla Avenue' all of F Street reserved for transit use F Street Bus Street between l4th Street and 8th Street �Smi th - 87 5) Pennsylvania Avenue Bus Street: all of Pennsylvania Avenue reserved for transÎt use between lAth Street and 7th Street' 6) llth Street Bus Street: all of llth Street reserved for translt use between K Street and Pennsylvanla Avenue' 7) 7th Street Bus Street: alì of 7th Street reserved for transit Avenue. use between Pennsylvania Avenue and lndependence be in effect In addition, more limited bus priority strategies wouldstrategies would and F Street. Limited on other segmenti of 7th Street D Street.Nl'r, D Street ;ï.;-;; "rtåUl ished on portions of l2th Street,Model Two!s central bus Sl'l' discussion of' fndependence Avenue. R frll "nã priority system will follow the forthcoming discussÎon of Model Oners more limited suggestions. ¡t Îs to these suggestions that thís rePort nob, turns 0ur previous discussion of K street terminated at 20th street NI',, two blocks east of the t^tashington Circle Underpass. A consïderable amount of of bus traffic has been sñifted to K Street durlng the coursethe the surgery rerouting has been last few months. A central cause of this l4etro construction p"riorr"a on I Street by the-picks and shovels of workers. Prior to "onttruction, I Street possessed a curb bus lane operastretching from lTth street to l3th street. The laners hours of lowed p.m. Right turns !{ere al tion were-/:00-9,ôO ".r. and 4:00-6:00 at various intersections along the length of this bus prîority facility. DCT r-outes 40, 42, \5,52, 53, 54, 56, Y3, Y5, Q7, Q9, 13,-L7 among routes ãitr"rr, a, ,"il aå a- i"rgá uaii"ty of VJMA and-ABet'lStreet.formerly used Peak hour portioÁs of I Street betüeen lTth Street and l3th for the 7:00-9:00 a'm' bus volumes were substantial, exceeding 120 vehicles ãiã ÀiOõ-6:00 p.m. periods. I Street'i bus lane was well justified' These routes have now been transferred to K Street and H Street, and presumably will remain off I Street during the remaining Metro-construcfollowîng îts lion p"riåa. Should these lines return to I Street bus lane be reinstated' restoration, Model one recommends the streetrs curb Hours of operation would be extended to 7:00 a.m. to 9:30 a.m. and [;ðö-p.r.-iã'ðito p.r. on weekdays. Jhe lane.should again begln, and tTtfr btreet and its first sugmeni would extend through the intersection of I Street and Vermont Avenue. At this point a 191". discontinuation is suggested to allow right-hand turns south onto l5th Street. Followl5th ing lilh Street, the l"nã'r second segment would extend between of hours Sii"ui and l3th Street. No right turns during the laners opeiat¡àn woutd be allowed at Óonnecticut Avenue, l6th. Street, Vermont Ãu"nu", or l[th street. At l3th Street, cars and trucks would be ;;;iii"ã to make right tùrns from the lane adjacent to the curb lane. serves a laige number of off-street parking facilities' Fortunately, from the standpoint of bus lane operations, most of these facilities'have entrances on the north side of the street. lmportant off-street facilïties on the south side of the street should be given the benefit of bus lane crossovers I Street �Smlth - 88 Street is served by many of the bus routes previously I isted for by is currently blessed I Street in a westboünd direction. The streetstreet to connectïcut from l4th a northside curb bus lane extending Avenue. lts trours of operation arã lzOO'9:00 a.m. and 4:00-6:00 p'm' Rlght turns are permittäd at varlous interseitions along the-laners ical"ñgi¡r. Model 0;;';uggests th!s lane be retaîned with certaln modif Firsr, hourr ãi operation would be extended one-half hour for ii;;. H segment p""t period to 9:30 a.m. and 6:J0 p.m. The first lane Avenue' past the intersection of Verrnont *ãul¿'rrn fror lAth Street No right turns would be permitted at l5th Street or Verrnont Avenue' No bus lane is suggested between Vermont Avenue and l6tfr Streett in order to give oth;; vehicle modes an opportunity to turn rlght onto extend between l6th street northbound. The lane¡s second segment shouldat either no right turns allowed l6th Street and lTth Street, with Connecticut Avenue or lTth Street. 0fflstreet parkÌng faci l.ities-are l4th Street, and bus lane crossovers could be considered in ;;;;; any cases of proven need. H Street is no longer a one-I^ray street, as it now carries eastbound lane.could be traffic due to ¡4etio construction on I Street. A busand l4th Street' betv,reen lTth Street considered eastbound on H Street subJect' ùor"u"r, Model ón" t"L"s no positlve or negative stance on this of and the lack due to the recentness of H Streetrs transformation time for evaluation of such a lane in terms of its impact on area suggested ir"ific and transit circulation. No bus lane isStreet and by the l8th street. between lTth i¡irt model for H Street westbound unfeasible, despite occäsionally Low bus volumes make such a lane severe traffic condîtions. ln addition, no bus lane is suggested for levels H Street between l3th Street and l4th Sireet, due to moderate which do not overly infringe on the of peak period ï."iit. congestions travel tìmes of routes s2-S6. eacf, �Smith 89 Modcl One cannot necommend a bus lane fon l8th St between H St and Connecticut Ave due to the modenate numben of transit vehicles cannied. This restraint is shown despite severe levels of congestion which tend to develop on lSth St duning the pm rush houn. ln addition, no bus lane is recommended for Connecticut Ave between H St ond I St, This block serves ês the west terminal for a number of WMA routes and thr¡s possesses €¡ de-facto bus lane. No reason is seen fon disturbing this status quo, l5th St between K St and Pennsylvania Ave also fails to be a cendidate fon bus pniority stnategies because of modenate bus vo lumes. The same lo9 i c unden I ies the I acl< of a suggested bus lane on Jackson Pl between Pennsylvania Ave and l-l Street. The reader will penhaps nememben that a nonthbound curb bus lane was suggested by Model One fon l6th St between H St and K Stneet, This concept wos discussed on page 66. Bus I anes for Connect i cut Ave n<¡nth of K St necommended by both models were discussed orì page 65. lt is important that buses proceeding nonth fnom H St be able t<¡ neach these lanes with a minimum of lost time. Thenefore, the first model necommends ð cunb bus lane be established nonthbound on lTth St/€onnecticut Ave between H St and K Streets. Houns of openation would be the am and pm weekday peak periods, No night tunns for othen vehicle modes would be penmitted at lSt or K St duning the lane's houns of openation. No southbound bus lane is suggested for this street segment because of the need for left hand tunns by many buses onto I St or H St (depending on the status of future Metno construct i on and connespond i ng bus renout i ns) ' Having examined the pnospects fon bus lanes on other street segments in the vicinity of K Street, it is time to discuss K St From the standpoint of bus volumes, K Street between 20th itself. St and l3th St, is one of the majon transit connidons in the downtown ôrea. The need fon bus lanes along this stneet segment is immediate lndeed, ûs descnibed in the finst section of this repont, and vital. an eastbound lane was contemplated for the Fall of 197l. The first months of 197 2 w itnesseld tnans it patrons st i I I wa it in9 fon th is necessðry bus pn i on i ty stnategy. Peak pen i od bus vo I umes on th i s segment of -f K Stneet exceed 150 buses in both dinections in both peal'< he even i ng nush pen iod's westbound bus tota I exceeds 200. per iods . Buses orì K Street now I arge I y use the centen four I anes of the noadway and have been removed fnom the outer cunb senvice lanes. An exception to th i s statement occurs t¡etween Connect i cut Ave and 20th St westbound where DCT buses st i I I use the ouûer senv i ce I anes, K Street stands as a grophic example of venbal pnomises fon betten transit by al I levels of govennment being largely negated by an inability to put relatively simple, low cost impnovements into effect' Patrons of this heavi ly used tnansit cornidor have no priority lanes to speed up thein jounney. ln addition, they ðre forced to wait fon buses whi le standing on ê narrow stnip of concrete devoit of ôny kind of shelten whi le vehjcles flow (except duning nush hours whene the propen venb is crawI) "behind" them. The safety, convenience, comfont, �Smith 90 and travel times of the transit patron ðre al I gnossly violated on K Stneet. Can any rational person neal ly wonder why tnansit patnonage Can any pencept i ve penson i s droppi ng, g i ven th i s murky examp le. neally believe that even new buses can. lune substantial númbens of new patnons into this kind of a transit environment. Thenefore, the suggestions offered by Model One must be viewed as minimal. Beginning at 20th St ô bus lane should be established in the cunb lane of K Street's center noadway and extend thnee blocks to Connecticut Ave. This lane should operate from 7:00 am - 6:30 pm Monday to Friday and fnom 8:30 am - 6:30 pm on Satundays. These hours of openation are justif ied by the nelatively.high volume of buses which use K St even during non-peak hours. (The avenage volume pen hour east of lgth St exceeds '30 except fon níghttime hours. ) No right turns woul,J be allowed fnom the center noadway at lgth, lSth Streets or Connecticut Ave. Local can, truck, and taxí tnaffic would use the two outen K Street senvice lanes and could make night turns at lgth St and l7th Stneet. Through tnaffic could use the centen lane of K Street's inner noadway. (ltr¡s plan is portnayed in Figune I I of the Append i x. ) one b I ock segment of K Stneet I y i ng north of Fannagut Square have a rlepanated i nner and outer roadway fonmat i n an eastbound d¡ nection. No bus lane is suggested for this shont block and nisht tu rns woul<J be allowed at the inteneection of lTth St and K Following lTth St a second bus lane segment should be established Street again ln the curb lane of K Stneet's center noadway. This segment would extend t o Vermont Ave with no turns from the center roadway permitted at I 6th St or Venmont Ave. The one b I ock segment of K St north of McPerson St agåin loses the separation betweèn inner and outer lanes. Following the pattenn just described no bus lane is necommended for' this shont block and right hand turns would be allowed at the íntensect i on o't K St ¡¡nd I 5th St . does T he n o-b The third segment of K Street's eastbound bus lane would begin at l5th St in the curb lane and extend to the intersection of l4th Street. Right hand tunns by buses would be penmitted south onto l4th Street. No-confl ict with bus tunns and thnough auto traffic from the outer lanes of K St eastbound towand l3th Street would occur. This statement is mede because K Street's eastbound bus lane would continue on past the intensection of l4th St. The segment of l4th Stneet north of Fnanklin Square again loses its separation between innen and outen lanes. Thenefore the bus lane would occupy the cunb lane of K Stneet eastbound between lAth St and l3th Stneet. All cö¡ns and trucks using the outen lanes of K St eastbound between l5th St and l4th St would thus be fonced to tunn night upon neaching l4th Stneet. No night hand tunns fon vehicles othen than buses would be allowed at l3th Stneet. East of l3th St Model One feels no bus lanes wi ll be needed on K St eastbound. Thene ane two neasons fon this decision. First, the volume of buses east of l3th Street on K St has dropped from its 20th St to l3th St levels. Second, it con be anticipated that only a managable numben of cðns and tnucks will have been able to f ilten through the funnels established by the three eastbound bus lane segments. �Smith :. I 9r This strategy has a numben of pnoblems given its limited natune. nst, buses ane I ike ly to be impeded by fel low. tnansit vehicles Fi which ane picÈin9 up on dischang'ing patnons. Thus, some buses môy seel< to pass via the center thnough lane which supposedly should caten to through auto traff ic. Second, many dnivers may resist altering thein driving habíts'and continue to insist on using K St despite its more limited non-transit capacity. lf this occuFs congestion is likely to build up west of 20th Stneet in the eastbound lanes of the Washington Cincle Undenpass. The neaden wi I I remember that Model One nànoutãs WVM buses via this undenpôss in onden to escapè Weshington No bus I anes were suggested for th i s underpass. However, C i rc I e. lanes on K St cause extensive congestion in the undenpass an if bus eastbound bus lane might have to be provided during the ôm weekday peak beginning at 25th Stneet. This would push congestion rygst of 'Zsih St; or iñ effect, out of the nð¡nge of transit,. Hopefully, the násult åbtuíned will be ô switch to tnansit use and no bus lanes will be needed on K Street west of 20th St. ln a westbound direction no bus lanes are fonged by Model One K St east of l3th St. Beginning at l3th St a bus lane is suggested for fon the cunb lane of K Street's center_noadway, The lane would run west to the intersection of K St and lSth Street, Sepanation is' maintained between innen and outen K St lanes over this stneet ;;n;;Ãt ¡À i *"=tbound dinection. The.refone, the typ" of. segmentation :,,, enõountereèl by the eastbound lane need not occun. No night tunns i'i'would be allowed fnom the center roadway of K Stneet at any invol'ved intersection including Connecticut Ave for cars, tnucks, etc. Buses, howeven, would be able to make a right hand tunn onto Connecticut Ave, At Connecticut Ave, DEC buses presently switch from the centen K St roadwoy to the outðn K St lanes. ln Model One., however, -these U"="" wãulJ'continue to use the innen noadway's cunb lane until lSth Street whene they wou I d tnansfer to the outer I anes. No bus I anes are recommended îor K St westbound west of I 8th Stneet. The strateg i es advocoted by Mode I One fon K Stneet seek to speed up tnansiõ senvice without completely.separating bus flow fnom However, substantial time savings.ane sti I ãït,,"",räh¡"1" tnaffic. uni¡cipated. These time savings should only-avenage. I - 3 ryinutes in Ãon-p"ãt hours but ane expecte4 to generate 6 - l0 minutes in time ¡V tnansit buses during houns of peak congestion.- .l! i: of pno"urui ã^t".r" importance that bus Àtops along this gegment of K St bepnotect to vided with'bus shelters. These sheltens should be designed the transit patnon from the dangers posed by vehicles using the outen lanes of K Stneet. Heating and l ighting ane also necommende-d. ln previous sections of this papen, segments of l4th St above K St and be low E St h/ere d i scusse d-. 0n- page 84. M ode | One 's recommendalane t i ons fon the I st segment of | 4th St's northboúnd bus pen wene disi od and cussed. Th i s segment oPenate d in the am weekday peak on Ave. The I ane extended bo a point 200 feet nort h of Const i tut i was discontinued at this Poin tto a I I ow r i ght hand tunns i nto offstreet panking faci lities and eas t onto E Stneet and Pennsy I van i a I ane Ave. Nonth of Pennsy I van i a Ave, Mode I One recommends the second segment extend to H Street. Un I i ke the first segment this foun block I �Smíth t2 I ane wou I cJ operate i n both the monn i ng' and even i ng weekday peak periocJs. No right tunns would be allowed duning houns of openation at F,qt, G.Sl or New Yonk Ave. 0nf y one off-stneet panking faci líty is affected by this bus lane and a cnossover could be esta6lished. No bus lane is suggested_on l4th St nonthbound above H St as môny tnansit vehicles tunn off l4th St at this location. ln a southbound direction no bus lane is recommended in the first model between K St and I St southbound, The neader wi ll rememben that cãrs us i ng the outer I anes of K St eastbound are fonced by bus I anes to make ê night hand tunn at l{th St. lt would not be prudent to have these vehicles encounten ô second bus lane ímmediately often their tunn, ln addition traffic conditions southbound in this block 6¡ne not as dismal as they become funthen south on l4th Street. Howeven, a bus lane is suggested on l4th St southbound between I St and New Yonk Ave. This bus faci lity would not occupy the cunb lane but would be situated in the lane adjacent to the southbound curb lane. lt should openate in both the monníng and evening weekday peal< peniods. Any cars which wish to turn off l4th St night onto H St or New Yonk Ave should be given every opportunity to do so. Signs should be erected advising motonists wishins to make such turns to enter the cunb lane pn i on. to I Stneet. No bus lane is practical on l4th St southbound between New Yonk Ave ond Pennsylvania Ave. A considerable numben of buses must make left turns onto F St and Pennsy'lrvania Ave and cunb bus stops ðne also vital. The bus lone strategies avai lable to Model One cannot solve the problems transit encounters in bottlenecks such as l4th St southbound between New Yonk Ave and Pennsylvanía Ave. lt was this nealization which lead to the binth of the bus stneets featured in the ' second mode I . ne pont's discussions of Pennsylvania Ave tenmineted on pêge rSth s t N,W, Between lSth St and lsth St the Avenue is senveð 48 at bv ô substan tial numben of buses eastbound. lncluded ane DCT Routes 8ô, 82 ,84,86, 88,30,.32,33,34,36,37,38, M L Approximate bus volumes ane as fo I lows: This 7:00 9:00 am 9:01 - l0:30 õ¡m I 0:3 I am - 3:00 pm 3:01 pm - 4:30 pm 6:30 pm 4: 31 pm êm east 3r 4l 29 (p.n houn) 62 103 Model One suggests that a curb lane begin at lSth St and extend east to l5th Stneet. The lane would openate during the morning and eveníng weekday nush hours. No right turns would be per"mitted st lTth St. Bus lane cnossovers would obviously have to be provided at the entnances to the White House and at West Executive Ave (which functions as a panking lot which cannot be denied access). tn addition, a night turn bus lane cnossover should be allowed at East Executive Ave, 0nly buses would be allowed to use the cunb lane between East Executive Ave and l5th St. However, othen vehicle modes could mbke a right hand tunn at lsth St by using the lane adjacent to the curb lane, �Smith _ 9j ln a westbound direction Pennsylvania Ave canries a substantial number of- buses between I5th St and I8th St.'A number of additionaI l:uses'f'rom noutes not conveyed eastbound (f2,[*4, E6, G4, U2, XZ) tunn rrorth at acl<son P I ace . Mode I One recommends õ¡ curb bus lane lre established extending westwand fnom l5th St to lTth Stneet. The lane would openerte in the am and pm weekday nush houns, No night hand turns woulcl be aIlowed at Madison Pl, Jackson Pl, ot lTth St. The occersional bus which uses l5th'St below Pennsylvania Ave does not merit ð bus lane. ln addition, no bus lanes are necommended in Model One for l5th St between Pennsylvania Ave and New Yonk Ave, This street segment is only two blocks long and buses need to service cunb bus stops and make left tunns at each end of the street segment. Thus, a cons'idenable amount of switching from lane to lane is necessity fon tnansit vehicles. These requirements make ð bus lane unfeasible despite.the fainly substantial numben of buses which use the stneet segment (DCf Routes 30, 32r 33, 34,36,37,38, Ml and some buses fnom ABtlW Routes 7 , I I , 12, ,6, 17 , l8), G St, befone Metno constnuction, was senved by DCT Routes 80 82, 84, 96,-gg, ThÀse-buses now use'H Stneet. lf'u;ã "h;;-trt""ã' routes ane nestoned to G St, Model One will not offen them the be¡efit lanes. Modenate bus volumes and anticipated bearable tnaffic of bus condltions mean no such lanes ane necommended fon åny pontion of G St, between l5th St and Massachusetts Ave, No bus lanes õ¡ne necommended by the fírst model for F St between l0th St and 5th Street. At present, this street segment is senved by DCT ltoutes 40 and 42. Modestlbùs vo.lumes dô not justify such a step despite occasional ly congested traffic conditions. ln addition, ho bus lanes ône suggested fon eithen 5th St on 4th St between H St ônd D Stneet, I n Mode I One, modest bus iso lumes and beanab le traff ic conditions also preclude the need fon bus lanes on any segment of D St between 3rd St ðnd 7th Street, H St east of New York Ave i's the new home of DCT Routes 80-88, fonmerly located on G St. tn addítion, a modest numben of WMA buses use H St westbound west of I 3th Stneet, Again, modenate bus volumes and adequate tnaffic conditions meõ¡n no bus I anes can be recommended by Mode I One fon any segment of H St between New York Ave and 4th Stneet. To complete thís discussion of non-candidates fon bus lanes in Model One, ño bus pnionity stnategies ó¡re necommended for New Yonk Avenue between ¡5th St and l2th St. Recommendetions fon l2t¡1 Stneet between I St and Pennsylvania Ave d¡fficult to make as this stneet segment is now undergoins Metro ane Howeven, stnategies wi I I be offerðd bãsed on constnuction activity. the assumption thet fonmer bus noutes wllt continue to use lzth St following its nestonation. No bus lane will be needed between l( St and G St ôs the majonity of lzth Stneet buses make a left tunn onto H St. Between Pennsylvania Ave and G St ô cunb bus lane is sugge sted for 12th St by Model One. The lane would operate in the pm weekd ay peak period and senve DCT Routes 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, K3, K4, K6, K7, K9 êmong others in a nonth bound dírection. No right tunns would be allowed at E, F, on G Sts during the lane's hours of openation. Cnossovers to off stneet faci I itíes would be discounaged, .J õ¡ �Smith 94 Between PennsY I van i a Ave and Con stitution Ave tnaffic is penmitted bus û' W has a to use lzth St in a southbound direct ion. ABconditions terminal one this itoo on the west s i de of the b I ock. Trafficcongestion onon blotk southbound segment ðre a functi on of rãcott"nded'Constitution NorthAve. Therefore õ¡ southbound bus lane is not i on in th i s b lock segmen t can become sevene during the bou,nd congest evening nùsh period. A short cunb bu s lane between. D St and Pennsy | '1.l, ar r --^ lllc Ildllrt swlrEly. vania Ãu" should cônry buses through the pn oblem no r i turns wou I d sht wåuld operate in the pm weekday rysh pen i od and :b. perm'itted for vehicles other than buses at Pennsy lvan i a Ave dun i ng 'the' I ane's per i od of oPerat i on. No bus lane is suggested in Model One for the lzth st Expressvolumes in addition, modðñate traffic conditions and busSt SW and mean ryay . D Ã"å¿à¿ northbound on lzth St between no br="i";;-ir --iñ l so app l i es to lzth St southbound ¡ ã["na"n"" Au". lnd =- "".l"u int aa southbound cunb bus lane should C St and D St. Howeven, bet would b.l*""n lndependån"" Ave and C Street. lt DCT Routes be "ã"n senve rãt. during ope "rt"Ulisheà both the am and pm pegh peniods and l1, .12, 50, 5ã; 45, yã, i¡, Lj, i4, V6 "" well as AB Ü !'/ noutes 9.,. allowed t3, íi', iÉ', ió'. ñísh¿'h.nå turns by other vehicles would be at C Sf fråm the lañe adjacent to the cunb lane' Bus lanes ðne also pnesently not needed on D st sw between lzth suggested St and ihe SW Mal I Bus Terminul. ln addition, no.bus lane is fact 6th Stneet despite the ià"-n St eastbound between 9th St and vaniety^"1.pT rush hour routes that this stneet segment sePves a lange for all foun areð tnansit systems. Hãwever a night hand turn south banned at the oÃto 7th St for Vehicles other than buses should bepm rgsft period' the weekday intersection ;i n-St unã 7th St during ln a westbounå.¿inection no bus lane î= needed between 6ttr St and lf the nonthside curb lane of D St SW between ilf,-Si on D Str""t. 7ih 5t and the entnance to the SW Bus Tenminal could be kept c.lear på"f."J ond standing cars dunils the monning.and evening nush.houns' "i bus lane would be n""deã ûs th; large majonity of-autos use the no in onder to tunn left onto the 9th St expnessway ".ntàn two lanes 'entnance. Th;;; Mo¿"1 one will not necommend a bus lane at this time Howeven, such a lane might wel I prove necesiãr t¡r¡= "tr"ãl'=egm"nt, cannot be kept clear of =ãrv-if-thei c cu"b-lãn" being discuäsed les. movi ng veh non- Model One,s nestraint in nelation to recommending-bus^.l,anes continues with n"spect to al I segments of C,.D, S14 andSts SW between 91d E 6tn St SW Mg"yland'Ave 7th St and S"utt-õãplt"l Stn"ri"] I t" to* I Àdependence Arr. ane a I so not i n- present need of Mode byOne DCT ãf I ndepenbence Ave i s served bus I anes. 4th Street soutñ bus volumeå and tnaffic conditions nesate närtåä"õõi Mä-, "¡ã ñs ¡ut the need for bus I anes. lndependence Ave between l4th St Nlf and lst St has a complex very pattern of transit service. Some segments carny.buses f"3:I.l:.Î::¡t 'l b)' re I at i ve- !v tg* ' EastboundL?' ãads wh i le othens are senved -OCi Routes 50; 52,.53, 45,,Y3, 53,, between l4th St and lzth St, '";;-;";;.;;J uiu th;'nuãnu". An am w"ekäav nush hour cunb lane ñ;"V6 taxis is recommended ou"" this stneet segment.. lt is sgggested that other t" use u-.¡=- iu;¿: n¡érrt'turns fiË vehicles to ;î=;-il p;;;ittåa than buses *"ulà-S.-pà"ritl"ã "t lzth Sõ from the lane adjacent �tì Smith 95 the cunb lone. Between lzth St and 7th St eastbound, I ndependence Ave is on ly senved try DCT Route 52 õ¡s other routes tunn night at l?th Stneet. Obviously no bus lane is needed over" th i s eastbound street segment. 7th St and lzth St lndependence Ave is senved }V it"ri..-i""iu¿¡;n-l'l t2, 13, 1.4,.l'5, ló. Buses bound fon Vinginia serve cunb side"bus';-" gto ps-and then swing across lanes of tnaff ic to make a left tunn-at l2t h Stneet. Given these conditions, Model One views o westbound-bus lan e over this segment of the Avenue'as unfeasíble, Between l}th St uld l4th St, DCT Routes 52, 13, 33, use Independence Ave ðnd no bus lane is justified. Runnins east fnom 7th st N.w, ^Dcr Routes 30, 32, 34, 36, 52 use lndependence Ave. Tnaffic conditions ðne usuatiy-Uáunu¡lð únti¡ 4th St is neached. Therefore, One does noi suggest an eastbound bus lane on the Avenue between [o$el and Ath Stneeti" ln¿eã¿,-ã;r¡Àõ7th St the pm nush hour, cðrs would tunn night at 4th St to reach D 5t the Southwest Freeway. At the pneseñt time, Routes A2-À8 u""-it.-"n¿ Avenue eastbound between Ath St and Cana I Slneet. Thus a pm weekday cunb bus would luqh-penlo! ng-night lane tunns be establ ished between +ln'St "ÃãSt with 3rd being penmitted at 3nd Street Jrning buld pm pm - 6:30 I ane's houns of bperat i on. Fieeway constnuct i on !h" presently encountened east .4:00 is of 3nd Street. While the Á noui""-" leave the Avenue shortly aften 3nd St the street gains a substantial number of WMA buses including r.ou.tgs B, e, G, f, J, [i, 0, Ho*"v.n, no bus lane is recommended by Model One thnoúgh'thå cónstnuction anea past the intersection of lst St NW. At this [oint ô cunb bus lanà is recommended. by the finst model extending bätween lst St South capital st, This lane would operate in th; pr r".Louy rush-Ë"¡;¡ ""¿ gnd no night turns would be allowed at South'Capital Stneet.' No lane would exist between South Capital Street und -(u veny shont segment). ¡n onder_tt províde fon-al IN"w Jersey Avã mode night turns onto N".t. Jersey Avenue. Fo I lowing New Jensey Ave thõ lane wou ld be again established and dinectly "onn"ãt with tÀe'lowen Þ.nn"yivania Ave lanes mentioned eanlier on page 79. No right tunns would Ë" ållowed at lst :t.sE duni.ns the lonã'"'horns of ãp."ui¡;;, rr-,i"-pu"ti.rlg" segment of .lndependence Ave eastbound is heavi ly congested buning tll" evening funh hours ond the bus pnionity stnategies süggested are viewed ôs vital. tnaffíc conditions and modenate bus volumes westbound lst St in Model One ane. nesponsible fon dictating nestnaint from 4nticipated in the establ ishment of westbound lanes on lndepend.nð. Ave. As the reader penhaps nemembens fnom_page^80, lowen Pennsylvenia Ave is with c¡ series of bus lanes. Thus,fewer cans per,.rñ¡t time should"luipped b" able to reach. lndependence Ave west of lst Stneet, ln addit¡on, WrlR buses leave the Avenue at Znd Stneet and A Route DCT buses do nåt ,.u lndependence Ave westbound. Therefore, Model One does not suggest ôny bus lanes fon lndependence Ave between lst St SE and 6th 5õr"et SW. At this point, PT rysh hgur buses of the AB t/ W and WVM systems join DCT Routes 30, 32, 34, 36, 52 between 6tn st and 7tn st. 'Thus. ä curb bus I ane i s recommended on I ndependence Ave westbound betieen and 7th St. .Th" lane Óth Stand no auto right turnswould openate ín both the am and Þm nush houns woylÇ b9 permitted at 7tt,-St-Jr"ins-horrs The most substantial timä^savinss *¡li-¡"-pn"ã;;;ã ¡v- 9f stnatesíes thq"pgnation. suggested between Ath St Sl{-.n¿"1"t-St SE b"=tUãun¿ and should nange between 3 - 6 minutes. Westbound between by DCT Route 52 ??d a_ larse. vani.ety of AB t/ - �Smith - 96 Mode I One does not. suggest bus I anes on these street segments north of I ndependence Ave: I st St between the Avenue and Pennsy I vania Ave; 3nd St between the same two Avenues; and 4th St between Constitution an'd lndependence Avenues. ln the latten case, bus volumes southbound are presently substantial but A2-48 busés turn left at lndependence Ave making a cunb bus lane impracitcal. ln conjunction with these nestraints no bus ianes are offened þV the finst model for Pennsylvanio Ave (tol lowing fneeway constnuction)-between Ath St and lst St NW. The new 9th St undenpass cunnently has a bus I ane. However , given the lack of buses to use this lane and the q uestionable va ue of rerouting buses to 9th St, the repont necommen d s the 9th St bus lane nemain in I imbo. The most importont tnansit corFidor nunning nonth-south thnough the Mall is 7th Street, Between E St and D St SW, 7th St is served by DCT Routes V4, V6, 70, 72, 74 , Dl , D3, Nl, N3, 33, 89,, Requ i ned left tunns and beanable levels o f peak houn congest i on do not make this blocl< ê viable candidate fo r bus lanes. Between D St and lndependence Ave peak hour traffic o n 7th St cen become quite congested. Approx imate peak pen i od bus vo I u me s fon th i s two b I ock segment ane as fol lows: South Nonth :8õ-3T7 :00 am - 9:00 am 60 27 4:00 pm - 6:00 pm Model One suggests a southbound cunb lane extendin g fnom I ndependence Ave thnough the Penn Centnal Rai lnoad Undenpass. Th e lane would stop at th i s po i nt and not extend to D Stneet i n order to avoid blocking right tunns for other modes at D Stneet. The lane w ou ld openate Mondoy - Finday,7:OO am - 9:30 am. Northbound a pm peak pen i od curb lane wou ld begin at D Strposs thn,rugh the rai I und er pass and extend to lndependence Ave, No night tunns would be perm ¡t ted at C St, Manyland Ave, on lndependence Ave. 7th St between Constitution Ave and lndependence Ave carnies a very h i gh vo I ume of buses. Approx imate present bus volumes are as I fo I I ows: N 7 :00 9:0 I õ¡m ôm !0:31 êm 3:01 Pm 4:31 Pm 9:00 am onth --õ'-Õ- l0:30 o, 3:00 t4 South -7Õr 4: 30 6: 30 (p"" hour) 30 t05 ln addition to high bus volumes a substantial vaniety of bus noutes DCT 30, 32, 33, 34, i ed oven this stneet segment including: îl: T?: Tà: '^3aZaç^?l¿.9'år*,lúrtl,l"8tl."l3'oÍ=å"18 i/ 'u e' t2' r3' As d i scussed in Section One of this nepont 7th St pnesently h as 6¡ southbound cunb I ane extendi ng from Pennsy I van i a Ave to I ndepend ence ane carr I|' �Smith - 97 Ave. Model One recommends this lane be retained wi th centa i n mod i fications, Houns of operation would be 7:00 - 9: 3O am and 4:00 pm 6:30 Þmr Monday - F¡nday. The lane would end at Jeffenson Dn i ve i n onder to a I I ow n i ght turns west onto I ndependence Ave. Risht tunns wou ld be banned for a I I veh ic le's except buses at Const i tut i on Ave from 7:00 am - 6:30 Þñ¡ Monday - Friday and onto Madison Drive during the I ane's houns of operat i on. ln a nonthbound dinection ê cunb bus lane would extend on 7th St between lndependence Ave and Constitution Ave duning the am and pm peak peniods. No night tunns wou ld be permitted at any involved intensection. No lane would exíst nonthbound between Constitution Ave ênd Pennsylvania Ave é¡s only the 70 - 74 buses contínue nonth beyond Pennsylvania Ave, al I othen noutes tunning left at Constitution on Pennsylvania Avenues, 7th St between Pennsylvania Ave and Mt. Vennon Place is served primani ly by DC I Rciutes 70 , 7l, 72, 74 thous h some WVIA buses tnave southbound to E Street oven a pontion of thi s street segment. Modenate bus volumes make bus lanes unfeasible oveF th i s segment of 7th St in Model One. Massachusetts Ave between H St N\,{ and 7th St/K St, K St between 7th St and 9th St, and New Yc¡rk Avenue between 9th St and lzth St, ane senved by DCI Routes U2, U4, U6, U8, X2, X5. Approxímate bus' vo I umes over these stneet segments can be found on page 79 whene H Stneet's bus lanes wene discussed. lt is important that tíme gained fon bus patrons via the H St lanes not be squôndered via congestion on these downtown street segments. Thenefone, Model One suggests ê nonthside cunb lane on Massachusetts Ave between H St and 6th Stneet. The lane would connect dinectly to the H St westbound bus lane discussed on page 80. No night tunns would be permitted at 5th St or 6th St to protect the viabi lity of this am peak peniod bus lane. Mode I One chose not to extend th i s I ane funther west than 6th St i n order to avoid blocl<ing important night hand tunns at 7th St and gth St on K St. (These turns cônny traffic westbound to Massachusetts Ave and K Stneet.) ln addition, no westbound lane was pnovided on New Yonk Ave because a lange numben of U and X buses cut back in the I lth St anea nather than continue onto Pennsylvanía Ave. ln an eastbound direction, a pm peak peníod curb bus lane would extend from 9th and K Streets to Mðssgchusetts Ave and 5th Street. No right turns would be allowed at any ínv<¡lved intersection duníng the lane's hours of operation, ln the case of both eastbound and westbound lanes, cnossovens to off-street fací I ities could be establ ished i n cases of pnoven need 9th St between K St ênd Pennsylvania Ave is senved by DCT Routes F2, F4, Fl, El, F9, J3, Y9. A small segment of 9th St above Pennsylvania also carríes Route 60 southbound. Bus volumes on gth St ôre moderate neaching ð total of appnoximately 65 buses ovep centain segments in the õ¡m southbound rush and less than 5O buses in the pm nonthbound rush. ln addition the need fon left hand tunns for Routes F2, F3, 60 at Pennsylvanio Ave funthen limits the uti lity of õ¡ southbound curb I ane. Thenefone, Mode I One does not recommend any bus lanes on 9th St between K St and Constitution Avenue. I �Sm ith - 98 ¡gth St between Pennsylvania Ave and Constitution Ave also fails to gain a Model One bus lane as it.canries. gnly a.modenate numben of õCf and AB t/ W buses. Betwee.n K St and Pennsylvania Ave, lOth St conveys DCT Routes K3, K4, K6, K7, K9 and lfVM Routes _l ,..2,3,4,5,11 southtound. Appnoximate present bus volumes are as fol lows: 7 :00 am 9:01 am l0:31 am 3:0 I 4: 31 Pm pm - 9:00 am l0:30 am 3:00 pm 4:30 Pm 6:30 pm South -TO342 2l (p.n hour) 32 ó0 Tlrese bus volumes justify an am weekday peak peniod curb bus lane fon l0th St in Modãl One. th" lane would extend fnom New York Ave to E Stneet, No right turns would be penmitted duning the lane.ns hours of openation ãt H st, F St, on E Street'. Howeven, a ríght turn cpossover could be established at G St following its nestoration. should also be allowed. Cnossovers to important off-stneet facilities E St presently carnies a limited numben of WMI buses and DCT nush hour bu"." belween l3th St and llth Stneet. No bus lanes e¡ne needed i n Mode I One oven th is two b lock segment. |ilñ'tfi bus vo lumes i,n on'ea¡übound dinéetion ane higher east of llth St on E St as of this system's runs cut bãck at llth Stneet. ln addition, Routes D2, and D4 use E St east of llth Street. Model One recommends a southside curb bus Iane nunning eastbound aIong E St between 9th St and Ath Stneet. The I ane need not and shou I d not beg í n at llth St fon two reasons. First, bus stops between llth St and l0th many DCT St give that shont block a de-facto bus lane, Second right hand tunns at 9th St should be allowed given the existetrce of the new 9th St expnessway unden the Mal l. E Street's bus lane would operate duning the weekday evening peak period. A time saving of 2-4 ninut'es No bus lane need be established is projected vis this facility. westbound on E Street. Both l3th St and llth St aFe impontant transít conridors between K St and Pennsylvania Ave. Model One recommends bus lanes on both stneets in orden to propel buses thnough focal points of congestion. No bus I anes €¡Fe pecommend¿d on I 3th St between K St and H St or between E St and Pennsylvania Ave. Between H St and E St, l3th St is senved by DC'f Routes L2, L4, T6, T2, J l, N5, L7, L9, 83, 85, T7, T9. ln o southbound dinection a lange variety of WMA Routes including A, B, C, D, H, l, J, K, M, S, T use this street segment. Model One suggests a nonthbound curb bus lane extending fnom E rSt to H St on l3th Stneet, 'This lane would only operate during the pm peak peniod and right tupns would not be permitted at F, G, or H Stneets durín9 the lane's hours of openation. A southbound curb bus lane would extend from l'l St to E Stneet, This lane, would openate during both the am and pm weekday traffic peaks. No right turns would be allowed at G, F, or E Sts during the lane's hours of openation. ! �Smith - 99 The f irst nrodel does not necommend by" lanes for llth St between H st and K Stnee,t. rn this.case, =tnang.iy "^"rõn, . southbound bus lane nonth of l-l St wou ld witneså tnoÃsît. Éu" ;;Ë;åton" with intencíty bus movements vío the-Gney¡,ãü^¿-i;ifrinal.i"¿;;f;;níns ln ê bourrd direction, a cunb bus lane would extend between-H-St';^ä southon I lth Stneet ond senve DCT Routes D2,_D4, SZ, ð5;^!4, 56, y5,Ë'St g7, 09. This lane would only operate fnom-ZtoÞ.;---õi¡o'å*-åÅ *ååtàuv*. In a northbound dínecrion, qcr Routes D2',^ Þf, po á;; j;¡n¿;d"¡r''wvrrr Rou.tes- 1, 2,.3, 4, 5, I I ånd, a vaní"[y t^lt,iÁ br=ã* north of E St. "i Oner. U"1:l ulq H !f"refore;, suggests ê cunb'bus lane-.xt.nains between E st street, This-rane rqyl{ op""ãt"-Jrni"ã-t"th the ðm and pm^weekdav peat< periods. add!tioni g:30 s"i"rã;;'hãr;" of õ¡m Ó:30 pm would be in effect,ln stimulaíe.¡";;;r;;;¡ul-u¡.Ëîi¡tî to the area.' I n the case of the sc¡uthbound iitÀ-öî-'l ãn", no n ight of turns would be allowed at G on F Sts ¿un¡"s-ï¡ã-ur"ilor". of openation. The northbound I ane wou ld _þ" pnotecteJ- uv Ë ¡õi",'t ;;r; proh ¡ b it ons gt F, G, ond H stneets. The bu= ran"s .úss"Ël"d-f;; ,r3th andí ilth at Stneets shou td nesu lt in anrícípared ti;;";;;t;; åt' z:ð-r¡;;;..'fon tnansit patnons' ln the case both stneeis u"s"r.i". of heated/ lighted bus sheltens would be "f valuÀ¡i" additions. The last two stneet segments of Model one to be cgntna I segments of conãt itut i on enc] p"nn"v I ;Jì adiscussed ane !h" Avenues, Constitution Ave east of Pennsylvani.-Àrr. wôs äiscussed on page 7g and the Avenue west of l4th St'was di""r.".J-";'õãsãSo. Eastbound from l{th Stneet, constitution Ave is ser.ved by . runíety;f-;;;h -l;'.ãdiã¡"nr'u-nr;Ë;; houn routes of.DC^Transit, AB tr !{ and wvM. of negu lar noute AB €i lV buses use the Avenue to neach' l2th'Sõ ;h;;; they make ð left tunn nonthbound.. Dinect!v am -; lane extendins fnom l5th St to l4th Si,.d¡;";";;d, -"anlí;;, cunb bus ""nn""t"j-ïo'th" ;¡m¡ lun lane should extend fnom l4th St to ð påint ISO-feåt east of 9th Street. Here the lane wou ld end in onder to al low r¡éfrt tunns south onto the g-th St Expnessway. night turn ènossover is necommended at lzth ^4. Stneet. Fol lowins 9th St the I ast nemaín ins-ea;;b;;^¡-¡;^;-r"!,iänt would extend to 7th St whene no night iunn."tã;-;;ñ;" m<¡des would be penmitted from the curb lane. Th"r" two bus gnlv openate-durins the am weekday rush p""¡ãJl a.;; segments would Ñä--¡u."1.;;; be pnovided fon constitution Ave åastbound d;;ing"ãn" pm rush *ãJl¿ ín Mode I One , Howev"nr. ísht hand tunns fon a I I ¡"'l'.r .n '¿','öõ'ñ except buses wou ld be banned southbound onro 7th St s"ti"ån "ãñ ;;ã-õ, No bus lanes .êre sugsested eastbound fon the À";Å;; between ¡õ-i,. 7tn st and Atl"t St i n e ither nu'sh per iod. J ln 6¡ westbound dinection, ô cunb bus lane would extend from 6trr st to 7th st on constitution Ave. it ¡=-'lánä-*å, l¿ openate only dur!ng !h" am.weekday. rush peniod and no rigr",ã'trnÃ-woul¿ be allowed at 7th st duning its hount.bf gR*r.tion. rñis senve Dcr Routes 4" r, A2, .A.4, AF., x.l , 97, c7. -sãl*"ãn iin lane would "Ãà'¡lock ðl-unã- rog", st, constitution Ave would be the häme år ;;"î;J cunb lane. The extensíon of the rane's operation ";--;; [n" nr.t peniod is "" int" pm necessitated by the addition..-9f. pm rush houn .""r¡"ä by u-rub.tuÅl¡.1 number of DCT, {B io \{,.and WVM buses westbounJ No lisht tunns fon vehicles othen than buses ;";¡ã'u" ai towed-Ãt-gtt "uån-tnl.-"¿;;;i-="gm.nt, or loth Stneets duning the lane's houns ;f ãp"";ii""ì. Between lgth st and .No curb -ãT period.l4th st. a tunnsbus lgnp would openate_olly dgríng the pm rush ni$ht ið b" ¡;w;ã uã i 2ih' ét-å" lãttr.'St-äurins "õu the lane's houns of operation. �Smith - loo pennsylvania Ave between l5th St and fth St is a transit corridon DCT, AB t þ', WA, nivaf ìnS f'St in importance; a substantial ngmber.of Avenue segment. vanious poltions of this and-WVM noutes and'bu.." u.ä B;; volumes d;"i;; p"ut. peniods exceed 200 fon the most heavilv fon blocks. Modãl'One ão"" not recommend bus lanesondenthe Avenue to allow St westbound il "=ã¿ f,ãt*."n John lvt."*n.ti P1.." and 7th Street, Fol lowing thg intensection of tunns ui-bãn-st unã 7th 7th St "¡sÀt 7tÅ Street, ô "r"b rr.bus- lane would extend westbound betweenãm -nr'l r"' , r .,- -.^,.11 rrPçl-durt \rrrr rrrì, L^+1' *ha 1..-:^^ rrm vvvit W(,Ulu ^-^..-l^ lëlflC lnlS Þtneel . And lJth i".f.¿ãV peak periods and from 8:30 ðm - 6:30 qm.ol Satundays'. No the during risht turn= rãr'¡å-b; p."*itted ui âny involved intensection ished^to would be establ no lañers houns ;i ;p;"ution and "ro..overt No westbound lane is suggested between l3th stneet fu;i ti[¡".. "if .nd l5th Si Uut somethins should def inite.ly_Ëð done to alten the it St and óutt."n áf tnaffi:c sisnal tîmins between l3th leviate, l5th Stneet. traffíc congesñather than al ih;;" "¡é^als-pnesentTy côuse, t i on on Pennsy I van i a Ave. Eastbound ð pm peak period lane woutd exteld, in Modet.ol:,^ and AB between I 5th St and I Ath St i n onden to senve DCT- routes except ti W fon tynn woul{ u: permitted õh;;ì;; Èip"""= Èu="u. No nisht Between l4th St and lzth,. present buses souti'rU"uÿ ;¿ l4th Streãt. bu.s lnurt¡" signuì ;y;les would negate benefits of any proposedand rã"orm.nded, Between lzth St l.Ã." and õtru" a'lane iq not Ave ith 5t-. "rnb-¡u. iun" (du. to the layout of Pennsylvania lane bus St the lane would not be a cunb. [àï*""n-lZifr Sl und llth a direct n""n-.^t;;=ion of the "r"b lane eest of llth, St).would ãp""at" during b"th the dm and pm weekday peak periods and fnom I d buses wou öiãb'; :"b; äõ ñ-s.¿;'¿ãv=l N; n i sht túnns except lane's hours of . for intersecã¡on duninq th9 i^""1rðå be al lowed -Ñ"-"åutbound bus lane is necommenðed for Pennsylvania ãó""ut¡ån. "¿-u;; the f inst model, eas!.of .7th Street. Aç:in,.bTl .__: Ãiã ñ.W., in shelters woulã U" " =ignif icånt addition t9 the quality of transit senvice along this impõrtant tnansit cornidon' lnrs concludes the discussion of bus pniority stnategies suggested seeks to by lvl"dàl On".- ff," model is a conceptu.al system thich break with pnovide fon better tnan.il =å"ui". while uubiding a "gmplete traditional uuug. pattenns åf "ity stne"õ". Carsr t"Ycks, and^taxís are allowed on all streets in the downtown ôrre6 at all times of the certain lanes at certain J"r.- They u"f.impty denied the use oftransit veh.icles may weave I i¡r"" "ç ttrå day in order that i ngton. in ""it¡". ;h; i"-"uv tÀ"ã"éf1 th" cráwded streets of downtown Wash bed takes a i q"Çy îash i';h; The mone "rud i ca | "mode I to be descn ¡ ft"" "n] p"i"utã auto- (e"J siven we are told by auto buffs) "* ti,. "isht-"f to use certain stneets. yet, this authon f irmly believes. the effects of the more "limited" *oulJ ¡" mone adverse on auto users than the modet .¡råt di;.;;;;ã and more "nadical" bus stneet system. tn Model One'. cansr.!9Ti"' on many faci lities tnucks êre fo".áJ to give uô their access to curb turns ane denied stneets duniÃs-p"uÈ hãur".'ln addition., right hand als'o intenfere at cnucial intersections. Buses using bu" lane= may oF when passing with othen tnaffic modes "h"À swinginl anouncl corners ;¿À;r-bus"s which ðne servicing boãrdins or departingpassengers' �Smith - l0l -[hus, in Model One, transit gð ¡ ns but ðt the expense of the otl'¡e n veh i c le modes . ln Model rwo cans ane..asked to give up thein rights to certain stneet ïegments. Howevenr_they gain nu*"rouõ stneetuse segments devo id of tnans i t serv i ce. Mode I '.Tr1o geõs the ,,nasiy o ld busã ãrt of 9hç way of the moton i st . I n add it iõn, cans h.ve tt . ,.ã ãt cunb lane in "thein stneets" and find tnåt ríghtltrnn= are not if," denied via a bus lane. Tnucks find they ê¡Fe ðenied tnansit stneets.only duning centa.in key-houns, 'fheythe-u"u ãi to are able make pi"! up and deliveriei at other times without i'¡õnt¡Ãã .riã, for vital cunb spacg. Taxis are alloweJ ¿";;;-{nansit stneets :xcept during. certain l."y houns of the day w;ith few nestnictioÃs. E,r91 duning. these k"y houns they will f ind taxi stand êFe6s ..t-aside fon thein benef¡t. Fanes wi I I know where to pnoficable cnuísing^wi.l I be lessened. Model Two catðh ðåU=. Unl" ã"õ"n¡i" =""È"needs õt tt the stneet .system of downtown Wash i ngton to the ""rr. var i ous modes. At the present t ime , ,. it is ,rveh ic le eat veh i c le,, " with congestion collecting all the bets. Model Two off.n" a-mone nat í ona I use of i ngton 's cone stneets in add it ion to ih. oppontun i ty f or vast I.lt/ash y improved trans it serv.i ce, Nlodel Iwo nelies on seven k"y stneet segments which would be c onverted into bus streets and in-one cêse a-busway. These seven k ey. segments ane: K St between 20th St and l4ttr Sl; H St between 'l 7th st and l4th St; l4ttl st between K st and Pennåylvania Ave; F St between l4th st and 7th St; Pgnlsylvania Ave between l4th'St ð nd 7th St; llth St between K St and Peirnsylvania Ave, 7tt-t Sd b.t"".n P enn sy I van i a Ave and I ndependence A ve . These seven segments are ntenconnected: they fonm a system. (These street segments ðre p ontnayed in Figure l0 of the Appendix.) Many tnansit vehicles w i I I be able to pnoceed through the heant of downtown Washington ithout gnduning a síngle point of congestion at any time of the lndeed, most buses wi I I not share their downtown noutes with d ay. ¡ even a single pnivate automobi le. Befone discussing these bus street segments in detai I the "ground rules" of the system wi l l be exploned. Finstr bus stneets in Model Two ð¡re F)ermanently ofl-limits to the pnivate automobile, 24 houns a duy, seven days a week. At first glance this may seem a bit hansh to the auto usen. However, the author f inmly believes that the overe¡ll impact on the auto usen is fan mone favonable in negand to Mode I Two ttran Mode I One. The L,us lanes of the finst model are a varied lot openating on mony ¡,r1,:reets, some in the monning peak peniod, some in the eveninç¡ peak per- iocl, some in both peak pen iods. The dr iv ing pattenns of motonists will need to vany fnom hour to houn in tenms of the noutes selected f'on any given CBD tnip. This is apt to be quite confusing to the avenage motonist. This conf,usion, in tunn, will probably produce more congestion fon the motonist and a centain numben of accidental, and intentional, bus lane violations. lf the typical metnopolitan anca auto rISen is apt lo become confused, imagine the impact on the typical auto usin3 tourist. These conditions are to ¡ be expected in Model One despite the use of easily visable signs and the co lon coded pattern of' lane marl.' ings. �( smittr 102 ) �Smith t03 Howeven, the stneet segments nesenved fon transit use in the second model would be completely barneC to cars. Fon the motorist these segments will have in reality vanished fnom his CBD 3treet system. Af'len a period of adjustment, motonists will be able to plan thein tnips via the stneets available fon thein use. Less ovenall confusion is to be expected over a peniod of time. Hopefully, the vanious pnoducens and distnibutens of city maps would clearly mark out the establ ished bus stneets on their products. This would mínimize adverse effects on most tounists. A senies.of lange, easjr to nead signs perhaps augmented by signa tt ights should clearly ln addition, concise, easy deliniate aII entnances to bus streets. to nead i nfonmat i on on how to neach pana lle I street sggments to th.e bus stneet should be located on these si 9ns The motoníst would lose access to a few street seg ments i n downtown Wa sh i ngton ,¿ i a the imp I ementat i on of Mode I Two . H oweven, he wou I <-l a I so I ose interf erence v ia tnans it veh ic I es on th ose stneets set aside for his use. Model Two means fon the aven â9e moton i st no more buses swinsling out f'nom a bus stop on curb bus lane into This model seeks to his lane with connesponding nenvous exertion. pnovoke a modôl tnip tnansfenence from can to bus; this basic goal cannot be disguised. Howeven, Femaining auto tníps would find v iab le stneet system set; .rs ide f or the in purposes; a street system devoíd of annoying conf licts with transit vehicles. é¡ lf e¡ stneet segment is to be set aside on ð full time basis fon bus use, thene wi I I be many hours of the week in which capacity fon othen modal f'unctions wi I I be avai lable. As mentioned pneviously, emengency vehícles would be able to use these bus stneets on õ¡ fulltime basis. Thisr alone should result in ô substantial gain in the nea lm o1= pub I ic saf ety. Howeven, the needs of menchants in tenms of tnuck del ivenies and/on pickups cannot be ignoned by this system. Goods as wel I ês people nrust {'low l'reely íf ô center city is to be a viable economic Thenefore, del iveny zones and houns would be set aside for entity. tnuck senvice on al I six bus stneet segments and houns for thnough truck usage would be established fon the K St Busway. Tnucks would be able to use all bus streets for pick up and delivery purposes dun ing the f'o I low i ng pen iods: aII day (thoughnotmuch tnuckinç¡ activiþy Sundays and [oIidavs: is ãnticipated); on hol idays where a substantial amount of commencial act iv ity occuns in the <Jowntown are a, such ðs Vlash ington's Binthday, Saturday's tnuck i ng houn s wou l d be ob sen ved 1 6t45 pm - 6:45 ôm; 9:45 am 3:45 pm 8:30 am; 6:45 pm - midnisht; These hours are Satun dav: midnight ished within th e context of trying to minimize impact on tnuck establ senvice whi le maximiz ing congestion f nee conditions fon transit senvlce. Therefone, tnucks ane held off bus stneets during weekday peak peniods. ln addítion, they ane banned duning Saturday's commercial houns in orden to attempt to stimulate an increase in downtown commercial activity on this d.y. Some merchants may initially moan oven these tnuck hóurs but they should be able to adjust thein openation-s with a minimum of pain. Truckers will face nestnictions on their houns of operat ion but i,i,orr I rr qa in congest i on f nee openat ing cond it ions on Monda y Findav �Smith tû4 bus streets. Taxi senvice is also considened to be an impontant facet of downtown tnanspontation in Model Two. The neaden gained a hint of this attention to the needs of taxis when the report previously discussed the establishment of taxi stands in conjunction with bus pnionity openations in the State Depantment and P St aneas. Taxis would be able to use al I bus streets and the K St Busway duning the fol lowing peniods: Sundays an d Hol idavs: al I day Monda y Fn i dav : 6:31 pm - 6259 am; 9:31 am 3:59 pm Satunday: all d.y ln acjdition taxi stancis would be established in conjunction with the bus stneets f on 'tul I time operation. These stands will be discussed individually as each bus pnionity street is descnibed The assignment of bus noutes to the vanious bus stneets in the discussion to follow is based on the pattenn of present bus routes. Adjustments will only be made to neroute buses via bus stneets and thä spaciol displacements will in all cases only be one or two blocks fnom present bus line patterns. Thene is a poss¡bil¡ty that entinely new bus noute systems will be designed for the Washington Metnopoiit.n Anea in the yeans !o come. This possibility is 19t vieweb ðs a dnawback to Model Two since new route pattenns could easi ly confonm to the pattern of downtown bus stneets. By concentrating tnansit routés on key bus stneets: Model Two takes local bus senvice completely off a number of downtown street segments. A map of these stneets which would become auto dominent f-aðilities can b,, f-ouncl in Figut'e 12 of the Appendix, 6th St N'lrl' tretween New Yonk Avenue and Constitution Ave is one such stneet se9ment wJrich woulcl lose tnansit senvice. DCT Routes G7' Xl, and F5 woulci be neroutecJ to 7tn St and the Pennsylvania Ave Bus Stneet. Route 87 would be nenouted via North capital St, D St, and the Pennsylvania Ave Bus Street. Northbound WMA service is neassigned to wou ld 5th Si in Mode I Two. Jo in ing 6ttr St in its trans it- less statusproceed K Stneet. Rðutes Fl, F2, F4, F9, J3, E¡ would U" 9th St below two blocks west of. "f'indSt via K St and be nenouted via the llth St 8us 9th their noute altened via the l4th -St Bus Street Stneet. 05 buses Ave Bus Street, while southbound Route 60 buses are and Pennsylvania ln addition, no transit service nouted viå the llth St Bus Street. St Expressway under the mall turninS this_street into would use the 9th an ímpontant auto thnough noute fnom K St to the Southwest Fneeway. One of the cníteria used for establ ishins bus stneets was the <lesire to pnoduce ð minimum impact on off -stneet parking flg¡lities. Since bus ,stneees wou ld block of'f access to off -street parking f'aci I ities they would in effect el iminate some panking spaces. However tl're stneicts se lected as auto streets present ly conta in the most These lots and gðrages numenous and larç'¡est o{'f'-street facilities. be affectecJ. New lots and ggnages, should any prove would not �Smith t05 have to be I ocated on the CBD pattenn of auto streets; such as 6tn St and gth St' l3th St between K St and Pennsylvania Ave also loses tnansit senvice in Model Two. AÀ pneviously mentioned it is recommended that a connect i ng stneet segment be constnucted between the foot Labon. of I 3th St and I 4th St nonth of the Depantment of panking Th i s stneet facillty would pe¡ss thnough on unden a multi-level segment be constnucted at this site. DCT Routes L2, L4' L7' whîch should lg, N5, 03, 05, T2, T7, T9 would be nerouted via theal4th St Bus SiÁeet-=ouit,Uound. These lines would be senved by new curb side l3th tenminal located within the Pennsylvania Ave Bus Stneet.between this (please see Fiôune 9 in the Appe.ndi*). Fnom St and iZtñ-St";"¿ tenminal these lines would pnocede nonthbound via the llth St Bus ð¿";"¿ to tf,ã F St Bus StreLt and then westbound oven th is faci I ity would unti I the l4th St Bus Stneet. Routes Jl, J6, 57, 59,on the north the llth St Bus Stneet and tenminate ^7 be nenouted via llth St side of tlre Pennsylvania Ave Bus Street betweenwould be and lzth nenouted pnesently using ¡3th Street Stneet. WMA buses St Bus Street and eastbound over the F St southbound oven the I 4th and PennsY I van i a Ave Bus Streets ' necessary, wou I d Routes 82,84, E6, G4 pnesently use Vermont Ave southbound to reach l5th Stneet¡ eiñd l5th St to neoch Pennsylvania Ave. The into ,:.,:."'r'l these I ines in onder to tnansform l5th St =ã;ã^A model reroutes suggested new route pattenn is southbound via The an urto St Bus the l4t;h"o.nidor.Stneet, *ã=tbound via the H St Bus Street, nonthbound via lTth St with a tenminal point nonth of H St on lTth St, eastbound via the K St BuswaY to l4th Street' Tnansit bus senvice would also be nenouted off 15th St below New York Ave in Model Two' Al I routes pnesent I y us i ng I 5th St between New Yonk Ave and Pennsylvania Ave would find the l4th Stneet Bus Stneet thein new home. ln conjunction with this rnove, thg second model takes all tnansit senv ice o.f.f p;;;=v'i""n i" Ave between l8th St N.!r/.' and l5th St/New York segment Àrr*. All "ori*.='ó".sently using this stneet be movedwould use the to the commencial St Bus Stneet. Transit-senviðe would thus fnont of the lVhite H Ave in ;";;s adj.".ni to H St and Pennsylvaniaaddition, chanter bus service *oüld be freed for auto use. ln H";=; ;ó;iã "óÀt i^uã to- u se the invo I ved segment of the Avenue. Rou',.e:s; X2, becomes ll2, wguld no longer terminate at Jackson Pl which alsothe H St ôn Bus pnoceed westbound via auto stneet. Thðse buses would G4 at l7th St above H Stneet and tenminate with Routes 82, 84, Ë6, Stneet. Eastbound they would use the K St Busway and the l4th St Bus Street to reach New York Ave and l4th Stneet' Tnansit senvice ;t;. leaves New Yonk Ave between l5th St and l4th St . via Model Two as Routest 8o-B[ì wou I d pnoceed v ia the H st Bus; stneet Tunninsl oun attention to the north, lgth St as mentioned pnevious I y, *orT.l w itness its noutes sh i {'ted to Connect icut Ave whene St pase 65...1 ¿ñ;t'íóul,J be ¡.,"o|."t..d by the br:s lanes discussed oniv ity wou ld not iã ii ¡ng its nestonat ion f nom Me'Lno constnuct ion act "* receive ãny tnansit noutes. lt would become another auto street (again, i':h. reacler ís ref'erred to Figune l2 in the Appendix for.a À.õ of all such stneets). All of I Street's formen noutes, including *"nv ice ,.2 ia tlre DCT, AB €; !tl, and WMA systems, wou ld be g i ven homes �Smith ro6 Busway. The exact allocation of by the H St Bus Stneet and K St not r'ígidlv spglif ied bv Model Two is these.outes i.-r-ðt-Àn¿ H St patterns of transit need' by futune but can be di"i"i"d by the second^model' A similan fate is Fonged fon G Stnestonation, G St wou I d i on Fo I I ow i ng its posi-M"t"o "õn=t"uct Róutes 80-88 L ^-^*^ ql¡ qu uv --J-neet between I 5th St unã 5ttr Street . -.,{-n Ug(;\rlllC would be conveYed via H Stneet' most nadical change in its Constitution Avenue witnesses theAr r tnansit senvice i s nemoved vehicre tenants in the """onä-rãåãr. pnimari ly to the Pennsylvania fnom Const¡tut¡on Ave and.reroutedW'nush hour noutes pnesently -Áf f DCT, Wl,tR, AB i/ Ave Bus Stneei. Penn;vlvlni:_1": Bus Street, usins const¡tution Ave would ú." theDepartment area bus prionity and the South White House "na State in I i eu of Const itut i on Ave ' on pusã= ¿g-i r ) :";#;="(äîr"rssed AB ii W-.À¿ WVM rou;;='u=¡ng Constitution Ave between the Regulan to these MemoriaI gr¡Aô.-.;¿ downtown Washiñgton ane.aIso nenouted north buses would turn Th"t. new street r";;";I= ut Mo¿åt i"". St lËh-êi.-sr= Street, F .st,Bus Street, lgth the loop upon and use an I r-95 l4th buses us,irig reaching the À"."t of the cBó: AB i/ !v via l2th St as will be St bnidge= *o,rlã "nt"" the downtown anea be renouted via lndepen' discussed =nolirvl''-ócr n"rtã" A2-AB would on the dence Ave to the 7th St g'=-Sã""àt northbound and circulate Stneets in the downtown anea pennsylvania À;;r'fftt, St, and F St Bus be befone "etu"ni.ã'=årif, viå 4th Stneet. Routes F2 and F4 wouldfon St Bus Street combinecl with V4 and V6 ="tu¡"t and use the 7tn w.ith ;ùhe noute the in jou"n"y= tf...árgf-, tfr" Ma I I . ln öon jt*qt:i;on . wóuld vanish from 1¡th Street chánges just ã.=""¡b;d transit senvicei on Ave. u"t*ã"n Þ"r,..t1;;" i a Ave and const itut its The last major downtown stneet segment to be stnipped of would Stneet' This stneet tnansit senvice by th. """ðnd model is-E lose its transit senvice between Pennsylvania Ave and Union Station plaza. wMA buses woulcJ be nerouted via the F St and Pennsylvania F St Bus are shifted to Ave Bus Streets. DCT Rouits-Dã *¿ D4Stneet' Betweenthe Pennsvlvania Stneet, Tth St, and D St iÀ-l¡à, of E also be devoid of transit Ave an,J l5th St westbound, E Sa would senvice. Ho*.u""r-i".n=¡i vehicles would use this street segment' and eastbound between the south l{hite House bus prionity segments the PennsYlvania Ave Bus Stneet' present WMA Final ly, 3nd St N'W' would lose al I of its via.the-l¡th St' rerouted transit noutes. These br=ã= would beand D St and lst Street' gr. Stneets pennsylvan¡."Ãu. ,'ill"r--Sl- term "auto This repont has been using the lose tnans it street" fon those senv ice v ia the *õu f ¿ lrtash inston CËõ' =t"äãt=-"[¡ "À tgnm is not technicallv implement.t¡ãn ãi ¡¡o¿"1 Two. However, this ic le modes wou ld be veh connect in rìô¡,t "f the rå"t thul othenTaxis would be allowed to use allowed to use these street segments. would be auto noutes at all horrs of th; clay.. ln i addition, truckspnudent be ¡t sht pnove to a penm itted "ãf",i" i " rod" . Uó*à""",autom sireets such ôs Const itut ion to deny tnucks the use oj' centa in rationale Avenue duri"s"h,ð;i*-ði p"u[-t'ãtf ¡" troi,rt.. The central �Smith t07 for this move would be that the street system should be dedicated to the movement of people at these houns. Goods could easi ly flow via truck movements at other houns, theneby pnovidins for a mone efficient use o{'key auto stneet segments. At various times of the duy, considenabl,e numbers of out-of-senvice tnansit vehicles can be found on downtown I'Vash ington stneets. To the gneatest extênt poss ib le these vehicles should confine their tnavel to the system of bus pnionity segments est;ablished by Model Two. lt will be necessany f or some out-of -serv ice buses to use sma I I segmeni.s of auto streets. Howeven¡ they sl'rould neturn to the lrus prionity system at the f inst f eas ib le opponttrn i ty. Considenation must also be given to thnee odditional fonms of tnanspontation in downtown Washington: the chanten bus, the intenc ity negu lern I y schedu I ed bus, and the a irpont I i¡nous ine and bus. These three modes of operation cannot be viewed as transit openat ions desp ite the s im i lan ity of the equ ipment ut i I ized. ft4ode I Two suggests that al I thnee modes - chanter buses, intencity buses, and ainpont I imousines - be al lowed to use auto stneets. The route pattenns of intencity buses would keep these vehicles off many auto stneets. The same statement app I ies to f i xed noute a i rpor-t buses. Ainpont limousines, due to the natune of the service they f-)r''.r.'í'orm wi I I need access; to auto stneets at all times of the d.y. Howeve? t ¡t m.iiglrt be w ise to nestr ict chanten buses f rom certa in k"y auto stnee-Ls duning lrouns of peak congestion. These nestrictions should be minimized ihu,never possible bãcause of Wash ington's need of tounist tnade fon i ts econom i c hea I th . Bus stneets and the K St Busway wiII also need to be made available to these three modes of transportation with minimal nestrir:tions. Model Two suggests that regulanly scheduled intencity buses have complete access to the K St Busway, the l4th St Bus Stneet, the. I ltfr St Bus Street, the Pennsylvania Ave Bus Street, ancl the 7tn St Bus Street on a fu I lt ime basis. Dul les A inpont buses woulil also have fulltime access t;o the K St Busway. lt is not anticipated that regularly scheduled intencity buses will need to use the H St or F St Bt.rs Stneets. Charter buses aird ainpont limousines would have access to all bus strerets and the K St busway duning houns ol'taxi use. Thus, they would only be denied ôccess 7:00 am 9:30 am and 4:00 pm - 6:30 pmr Monday - Fniday. Stonage spðce in the cunb lanes could be made available fon a limited numben of chanten buses on the 7tn St Bus Street. This space could be used except duning the hours just I isted. Cunb space on other tnansit streets would be at a pnemium because of bus stop nequinements and thus stonage space fon chanten buses would probably not be avai lable. Moclel Two netains a I imited numben of downtown streets which ln all cé¡ses, have tnansit senvice but no bus priority facilities. bus volumers €¡re modest and tnaff ic condit,ions usually modenate. These stneets wene netained because they eenved areas in need of tnansit service. Rerouting bus senvice from these stneets to tnansit pnionity routes wðs viewed as an undue bunden on the involved bus patrons. A numben of stneet segments south of the Mall fall into �Smith r08 th i s categony irr the second mode I . C St S.W. between 6tlr St and Canal St,3rd St S.!ì/. south of lndependence Ave, and E St S.W. between 7th St and Ath St would be served by a limited numben of transit buses without tlre benefit of ôny kind of bus priority stnategy This situation v,,ould also be encountened on 4t¡'t St S.W. south of lndependence Ave, 7tn St S.!V. south of D St, 6th St S.!'J. south of lndependence Avei, and D St S.W. west of 7tn Stneet. 7th St S.!./. between lndependence Ave and D St loses most of the priority lar¡es ¡t wõ¡s ërssigned in Model One Southbound, this bus stneet segment wou I d not have an y bus lane in Mode I Two. S ince 7tV't St above lndependence Ave will be ô Bus Street in this model, the only cans which could enten this stneet segment would be via right tunns from I ndepen<ience Ave or C St on fnom the FAA and GSA auto ganages. This I imited numben of autos should pose no thneat to tnansit openatic,ns. lt is assumed most thnough tnaffic previously usins 7tn St wi I I find ¡t pnudent to use the 9th' St Expressway and the local tnaffic which would nemain could be easi ly handled. Nonthbound the finst model's pm bus lane for this stneet segment shn i nks to e¡ one b I ock cunb I ane between Mary I and Ave and I ndependence Ave. No nisht turn would be allowed at lndependence Ave duning the lane's 4:00 pm - 6:30 pm weekdays period of openation. ln effect, th is bnief bus lane exists to pnotect the south approach to the 7tt't St Bus Stneet. Model Two's suggestions for lndependence Ave west of 7th St ðne similan to those found in the f inst model. An am peak peniod cunb lane would stretch eastbound fnom l4th St to JZth Stneet. Auto night tunns at l?th St would be penmitted from the lane adjacent to the cunb lane. No bus lane would extend eastbound between lzth St and 7tn St, ô stneet segment which would continue to be senved by DCT Route 52. No bus lane would extend westbound between 7th St and lzth St, ô street segment which would continue to cõ¡nry ABf/l{ buses. Since no vehicles other than buses cou ld tunn nisht fnom the 7tt', St Bus Stneet, it is anticipated that traff ic conditions will not im- pose undue rebtnaints upon these tnansit movements. No buses would continue to use lndependence Ave westbound west of l2th St as all tnansit service would be nerouted via the l2tl\ St Expressway to the Pennsy I van i a Ave Bus Stneet. C St und en goes a transfonmation in Model Two.' As discussed on page 83, a il ,nonthbound tnansit senvice would be taken off l4th St fnom C St S. W. to the )4th St Bus Stneet which begins at Pennsylvania Ave. T he two south I anes of C St between I 4th St and I 3th St become bus lanes and carry AB ti W and IVVM buses between l4th St and lzth Stneet.' These two lanes would be fulltime bus lanes and convey trans it veh'ic les i n both east and west d irecti ons. ln nea I ity a "mini" bus street is canved out of this shont one block stneet segment . The {'oun nema i n ing lanes wou I d cont inu,e to serve westbound tnaff ic and would'not be utilized by transit vehicles. Between l3th St and lzth St, AB fi W and WVM buses would use C St without the benefit of ð bus lane. lt is not anticipated that they will endure long delays in this block given thein "run around" congestion west of I 3th Street Routes F2 ond f 4 in Model Routes V4 and V6 ¡r.'e "6¡t')ined with Two and nenouted v ia ;,i e 7th Street Bus Stneet el iminating the need �Smith t0g Engnav'ing. at for their pnesent tenminaland the Bur eau of nat i ng at theRoute 50 Southwest D St SW term i St wã,, lå p"o"L"d via l}t'h ice wou ld rep lace V4 and V6 service PresentlY Br; T"nm ina I . T'h is senv f:ãrn.l at the tenm i na I dur i ng of f -peak Ihouns. This would allow no core t nar, s1'er bu s ser v i ce f rom the tenm i na to the city's commencial45 time in off-peak houns. Route Á""tft of the Mal I fon the first S'!'J' Ma tl Terminal, while Routes U5 v¿ou ld a lso nun thnough to the ;n¡ X7 would begin and end thein joun neys at busrstoPs located on lzth st s.w. bus lanes are necommended for lzth St between C St and D St S.W. in th., =."ond model because of anticipated lane wouldtnaf-As in Model One a southbound curb moderate openate fice cond¡t¡oÃ". peak the.am and between lnd"p"Ãd"nc. Av" and C St duringwoul'd asain pm weekday {'nom be allowed St night tunns fon autos onto C bus lane would be pnovided ;;;ï;ã. iñ; iÀn..¿i"""ni to the cunb lane. No the substantial numben nonthbound oven this stneet segmentr. despite..emovins buses from l4th of buses which would now ú; "ðñ""v"á,{uq'!o Expnessway, north of st st northbound. The entrance to tire lzth buses' dur ing the am and pm "Áu.r, to I à .on I y be open. lndependence "., and this steb should control nonthbound tnaffic ;;;ùã;t-p""k ;";:íod= b" t}'tt't St south of the Avenue ;;i;;;t D St As in the f inst model, no bus lanes would be provided onTwo' Terminal in Model s.w. between lztv-, st and the s.t4,.itMall Bus to th i s restna int ' Ãnt ¡c ipated moã,..at. tnaf f ió cond i ons lead display.nestnaint in not ln addition, the second moclel will tenminal and 7tn Stneet' suggestAutos i¡n"ËJ;"¡;;á= on D St between the turn at 7tn the bus stop ã ut=o b;.irl" to make a nisht block west of 7tt't St would be lt-".u "äif pnesently on-thÀ south side of õn" pôge 92, a westbound bus lane I"rã""¿.' As discussed pneviously, side might have to be establ ished ¡f lhe'nónthmeans curb lane cannot be ng veh ic les by othen ' Mode I Ïwo does nekept c I ear of s'tand i those commend that a number of 70, 72, 74 A"ses, including "!l D St to the Mall, b. rerouted via pnesently tenminating nonth-of . This wi I I complete the impnoved serve the sorlh Vfest"Bus Terminal terminal via the off-peak senvice suggested fon thisThe impnovement in previously bus senvice di scussed "*teÃ;¡on.-ðt Route 50' ens once the LlEnf ant P laza Metno wi I I enhance-ini""-mocla I tnansf duning off-peak hours Station opens. However, clespite new servicethe SW Terminal will that b;"ti;;;"=' tO*.o.t 70, it- ¡s "nt¡cipated rátn" ¡n pn imar i ly a nush hour f ac i I ity ol' 7 tn st Mode I Two's suggest ions fon lndependencB A.ve east by the f irst mode I ' No bus lanes c lose ly r"="rU lã t¡,ðä" of f ened A curb would be p"árrì¿"¿ eastbounã Uàt*ä"n 1th St and 4th Street' of lndependence Ave between 4th and t¡¿" lane woulcl á""rpv tt".ortñ 3rd Street' Sts, "¡iñ nã'niSht tr"ns-penmi.tted u[ periods' No This lane would 3nd cunb lane weekday.peak openate drrinS the ã,n "ld ôry and t st' Street ' At I st St a second uãi"*"n ¡t¿' St is South "o"o**"nåäã eastbound cunb lane ="gr"Àt would be established and extend tothe turns would be penmitted duning Capital Strå.i *t "r". nõ night of operation, No eastbound lane would lane's am ";ã-pmip".k p.nióds 'sà"tr-, Cap ita I St and New Jersey Avenue. Fol lowing ex ist b"t*."n No �Smith ll0 th i s inte.nsect ic,n a f ina I am-pm peak pen iod lane segment wou ld be e,stablished ancJ ccnnect dinectly with Pennsylvania Avenue's southsi<le bus lane <Jiscussed on page 79. ln a westbc,und dinection no bus lanes would be pnovided on At this point, lnclerpendence Ave between lst St S.E. and 3nd St_f.!: join Routes 30-3Ó, 52' 54 westRoutes A2-48 would be nerouted and bound to the 7tl-i St Bus Stneet. Thenef one, a cunb bus lane i s suggested betwee,n 3rd St and 7 tn Street. The lane wou lcl openate drn i ng the am and pm weekday peak pen i ods and no n i Sht tunns wou I d be a.l..l.owéd at 4th St on 7th St duning the lane's houns of openation. Howeven, a night tunn cnossoven is necommended at 6ttr St in orden to senve parking ç."i I ities located in the Mall anea. This bus lane would protect the east appnoach to the 7th St Bus Street ln ad dition to the 7tt¡ st Bus Stneet, tnansit vehicles will be able to cnossr the Mal I via thnee othen conridors: l4th St (south-litÀ 4th St bound on I y ); 'åontinueit (Nonthbound only);southbound(both dinections). below Pennsylvånia to use lAth Stneet Buses wi I Avenue. A s in Model One ð cunb bus lane will extend from Pennsylvani.a Ave to .fet fenson Dnive whene it will end in orden to allow nisht tunns onto lndepende:nce Ave. No night tunns would be allowed at Const i tut i on Ave on Mad i son Dn i ve dun i ng the I ane's. houns of openation which woul<l include both the am and pm weekday pe.ak peniods. As in Model One, a second southbound cunb lane would extend between lndependence Ave and C St. Tlr'e lane wou ld on ly operate dun ing the pm rlrh peniod as it would not have to senve the substantial am DCÏ br= volumes. DCT buses woulC tunn left at lndependence Ave' DCT, AB tl W , and WVM buses nerouted from l4th Stneet northbound would use the l}th St Expnessway to reach locations nonth of the The lndependence Är" entrance to the Expnesswayl=-noute rrnder Mal l. 'b" closed to oll vehicles except buses 7:00 ðm - 9:30 the Mall would êm ancl 4; O0 pm - 6: 30 prn: Monday through Fn i day. At othen t imes, cans woulcJ be able to join tnansit vehicles in the use of this entrance. Tlre east lane of the Lñree lzth St lanes unden the Mall would be nesenved fon tnansit duning the houns just l isted and no night tunns fon othen vehicle modes would be allowed at Constitution Ave duning the lane's houns of' operation (tti¡= statement appl ies to the two nemeiining Expnessway lanes an,d does not appIy to locaI traffic pnoceediñg f'rom Lhe Mall aned via lZth St between Madison Dnive and bonstitution Ave). Cans and tnucks wishing to tunn night on Constitution Ave would utilize l4th St and those wishing to turn left on the Avenue would use the lzth St Expnessway unden the nationale of this plan. lt should be stnessed that despite the reservation of' trans it lanes¡ cëu"s and trucks w i str ing to pnoceed acnoss the Mall woulcJ not encounten tnansit vehicles on l4th St nonthbound, the gth St Expnessway, I -95 l'o I low ing i ts open i ng to tnal'f ic or 3nd Stnee':t. 4th St continues in Mo<Jel Two, to senve Routes 60, R5r.F5 northbound but neceives no eastside bus lane above lndependence Ave. Routes A2-48 and 54 wou lcJ use tlre '/ I'h SL Bus Street northbound ' Southbounc] Routes 60, R5, F5, Al, A2, Ã4,46, A8 would use 4th St between Pennsylvunia Ave and lndependence Ave. Howeven, no bus lane is pnovide<J in the anticipation that mosl; Lhnough auto and tnuck I �Smith ilr ln this tnaf f ic wou ld urìe 3nd St on l-95 fol lowing its completion' w i thout transit service case , t'h St cou ld handle local traffic and uncluei consr(lst ion ' il-tinSl otrr attent ion nonth of the Mal l, Pennsylvania Ave bctwr:r:n 4tfr St ern<l 7th St (t'n" ù;sinn ins of !t ç Avenúe's Bus $tneet) bus lanes woulcJ senve th" nout"s .iust clescn¡U"¿ fon 4th Stneet' NoAvenue over this woulcl be provided. Roule 38 presently carried f"?q seqment, would-¿;; nenouted to D St fon its tnips to.andwou ld Union '\^tMÁ be ion Routes us ins the b locks under d i scuss S;#;;;: s anticipated that to D Si "ÃJ the 1tt St Bus Street' lt this street seç¡ment, .i "ãrout"¿ amount of local traff ic will use ;ì;";-roJã=t Model bondening as it does on two Bus Streets. Therefone,of 7tn Two on the just east St stand be establ ished =rgõã=t="tt.,ut u i.^i side of Pennsylvania Avenue' Sh "oJãt"t Between l4th and l5th Stneets, Pennsylvania Avenue would carry between the Pennsvlvania Ave a sub;;;;;;;r ^rruã" of buses westboundvehicle modes will also use Bus Stneet .nJ-H"*ilton Place. Othen this stneet =ãõ*"nt but tnaffic conditions ane expected to be PenC""Ë tnavel ins nonthbound on l4th St upon neaching Bus ¡l¿À""t.. blocked bv the l4th ;;;¡rr-',;. Rrr" "¡tt f incl Ih"¡" pathto tunn.liþh!. onto E Street St (neach l3th one nL"d Stnee.f: " Tlrey wi I I tlreref are õirt;,.,"t.,i.;-ånto pennsylvaniu Ã"" (neach l5tÈ St). No bus laneswith of the Avenue' ln keeping suggested f or tl.r is one block segment taxi stand Model Two,s comnìitment to betteñ taxi senvice awest of l4th should be stneet. the brock just ished oà [n" northside of Areá and the Pennsylvania Ave ""tiur Eastbound between the Stote Department B;; Stneet buses would use E St between l5th St and l4th Stneet' No bus lane is suggested' The one b I ock segment of F St between l4th St and lsth St rvou ld block would nun i nto the I 4th St and F St Bus Streets. Thus, the be utilized fon panking in effect become a deaclend stneet. lt could ln addition, a taxi stand could be located or as a shoppen's mall' on the b I ock H St in Model Two is senvecl by DCT Routes 80-88 east of llth a.n: Stneet. Modenai.lbr. volumes mean no by= lanesadd it suggested fon -and ion: rìo bus. ln Maseachusetts Ave. H St between I l¿À St betweien Massachusetts Ave lanes would Uå iórÃa on 4tt1 St or 5th Stnew noute,pattern includes D St. Routes D2, D4,40 f in¿ thein ";¡ of these two stneets between F St and D St. =;õ*;."¿; ity p lans l'9. D St N .W. between 3n<j st eastbound and Delaware A,re were discusse.J. ln Model Twoin both theand westðm and lanes were providecl which operated bound cunb as buses f'nom wMA I iìoute= oz , D4, ;;-;;=¡, pà" iods. DcTwene served by D40, 38 as wel the second model, Stneet. ln l,JrK Þärt"" R'rBrCrH,, St Routes 40, DZ;'n4 á^¿ selected WMA runs would reach Dnunssouthbound would neach from F St via 4th Street. Route 38 and selected wMAis suggested, theneD St from Penn=vi""^¡i Ave via 7tn SL. No bus lane Westbound ô cunb 3nd St. iorã, fòn D Sl á"stbound between ltt-t St and St and 5ttr Street' lt pnovidecl only between 4th bu= i.n. would be 0n page 7b, bu s pn i on �Smith tl2 wou ltl operate in bottr the monn inç¡ and even ing¡ weekday peak 1>er io<ls and no nis¡ht tunnsr excr>pt for buses, would be allowed at 5fh Stneet. At 5ttr St, Routes D2, D4,40 an<J selected WMA nuns would tunn nontlr to reach F St and no westbound bus lane woulcJ be needed on D St between 5th St and 7tn Street. Between 5Lh St and 7tn St, F St would canny DCT Routes 40, D2, D4 and selected nuns from a vaniety of WMA Routes including 42, the T line. No bus lanes would be pnovided between 5ttr St ancJ 6tn Street. A westbound cunb lane would be establ ished, howeven, between 6ttr St and 7tt't Stneet. The lane wou ld op."át. dun inó thc morning and evening weekday peak peniods and no night turns would be allowed at 7tl\ St during the lane's houns of openation. This lane wou I d be estab I i shed i n onder to pnotect the east entnance to the F St Bus Stneet. lVlodel Two'r; plans fon buses depanting from H St east of Massachusetts Ave and seeking to enter th¿ city's cone, DCT Routes lJZ, lJ4, U6, U8, X2, X5, ðne similan to those found in the f inst model. A nonthside cunb lane would be establ ished on Massachusetts Ave between H St and 6tfr Street. This lane would connect dinectly with the westbound H St bus lane and openate in the am and pm rush houns. No night; turns would be allowed at 5th St or 6th St duning the lane's houn$ of openation. No westbound lane is necommended for Massachusetts Av'e west of 6tn St, or K St between 7th St and 9th St in ot^,.ien to avo id b lock ins impontant r ight hand tunns nonth at 7tt't St and 9th Stneet. Route U and X buses wou ld continue their pattern of cutback senv i ce to I I th St and thnough serv i ce to the Lafayette Pank aneô. Cutback nuns would tunn south onto the I lth St Bus Stneet and thnough nuns would pnoceed westbound via H Stneet. Due to the complex cinculation pattenn of the ðnea including the movements of Gneyhound and Tnailways buses, no bus lane is necommended westbound on New Yonk Ave between gth St and H St. ln an eastbound dinection no bus lane is suggested fon New Yonk Avenue between H St and 9th Stneet. Between 9th and K Sts and Massachusetts Ave ancj 5th St, ð cunb bus lane would openate eastbound duning the am and pm peak peniods. No right tunn would be allowed at dny involved intensection duning the lane's houns of openation. Crossovens to off-stneet facilities could be established in negand to both lane segments just discussed in cases of pnoven need. Model Two suggests no bus lanes for H St between llth St and l4th Stneet. llest of l3th St auto tnaff ic wou ld f ind H St a deadend Stneet terminating at the intensection of H and ¡4th St Bus Stneets. Thus, veny lisht tnaffic is to be expected. A taxi stand could be establ ished within this one block segment Ttlt St between Pennsylvania Ave and Massachusetts Ave would continue to neceive transit senvice by Routes 70, 7ll, 72, 74 in Model Trvo. ln acldition, Routes Xl, F5, G7 would use this street segment. Between D St and Pennsylvania Ave, DcT Route 38 and selected WMA nuns woulcl use 7th St in both directions. Between F St and Pennsylvania Ave DCT Routes A2-A8 would use the stneet southbound comp I et i ng the i n I oop thnough the CBD. Diisp i te the substantial bus volumes rvl¡ir:h would be genenated on portions of �Smith - ll3 7th St by these route altenations no bus lanes ane suggested fon rhi s scgment of 7t'n Stneet. lt is anticipated that the existence of 7 ttt St Bus Stret>t below Pennsylvania Ave will cause thnough tnaff ic to f ind not.rtes othen than 7tt't Street. Therefore, the r.rãinin9 loc al tna{-f ic, along with the transit noutes listed, should be able to use /th Stncert nontlr ol'Pennsylvania Ave without undue congestion. The K St Busway extends to l4th Street.Between l4th St and 9th St it is anticipated that the need fon bus lanes will be abated by moderate tnaff ic conditions. As in the case of othen bus streets, ¡t is hypothesized that motonists will, to a substantial degnee, avoid the dínect appnoaches to this facility and switch to ãltennate noutes for thnough tnaffic tnips. The streets in question could then hand I e tlre nemð in ing loca I tn ips w ithout undue bunden. Thus, the second model doer; not suggest any bus lanes fon K Stneet between 9th St and I lth St despite the fact that buses travel ins above K St on 9th St wou ld tISe this two block segment to gain ."""Às to the I I th St Bus Stneet. ln orden to avoid tnansit impact to the gneatest extent possible on lOth St, WVM buses would no longer use this street southbound between K St and F Stneet. These buses, in the eecond model, would turn night at I lth St and pnoceed southbound on the ¡ lth St gr.-ðt"".t. The new suggestecl noute pattenn fon WVM I i nes | ,2,3, 4'5'll would be southbound via tl-re llth St Bus Stneet to F St whene they would turn left an<J pnoceed one block east oven that bloc k's Bu s Street. The buses would then proceed south to the Pennsylvania Ave Bus Street via lOth Stneet. As pneviously discussed, page 70, tnansit service i s nemoved {'nom I Oth St above K Stneet. The new route pattern for IÍVM buses also makes lOth St an auto stneet between K St and F Street. No autos will be able to tunn nisht at lOth and Pennsylvania Ave given the fact that the Avenue wi I I be a bus stneet. ThenLfone, ¡t is anticipated lOth Stneet's west cunb lane will nemain fnee of congestion. This being the case¡ the second model does not provide a bus lane on lOth St southbound between F St and Pennsylvan'ia Avenue. ln eddition, Model Two pnovides no eastbound bus lanes on K St between | 4th Stneet and I lth Stneet. L Routes present I y tunn i ng south on l3th St will perform this tunnr as previously cJiscussed, rigñt onto the l4th St Bus Stneet as wi. I I \dMA and AB i/ W Farragut Squarã buses. Thus, only DCT noutes D2 and D4 and WVM buses wi I I us" this complete stneet segment eastbound. Routes K4, K6, J6 among others, would also use K St between lzth St and I lth St. Competing auto tnaffic is expected to be mo<Jenate estr)ec ia I I y between l4th St ancj I 3th Street. ln a r{cstbound dinection DCT's L Routes will use K St between ¡ lth St tìñtJ l4th St as w i I D2, D4, T2, T7, T9, 05, N5 buses and some t4/VM tnansit senvice. ïhus, it is impontant that the east entrance to the K St Busway be pnotecterd l- nom undue congestion. ln a westbound direction the nonth side o{'K S t between l3th St and l4th St contains two outen sen v i cr-: I anes, ê bu f' l'en zone and two innen center noadway lanes. Since autos travel ínS west bound on these centen lanes would have to e i then tunn n i ght onto I 4t h St on swing out into the outer senvice lanes, ¡t is recommended t lrat the two K St center lanes westbound between I 3th St and I 4th S t be nesenved fon tnansit use on a penmanent basis. This mini-extensio n r:l1' the K St Busway wou ld protect the I �Smith ¡t4 in segment 1'nom entrance congest i on . Between I I th St and I 3th such St, no westbound bus lanes ane necommended fon K St. lrlithout St could make both left and nisht tunns onto the I3th lanes cars auto stneet. Model Two's west entnance to the H St Bu S Stneet is located ud i at lTth Stneet . Howev€F ¡ ,. ér substant ia I numbe r of buses i nc IiSthng St 80-88 rvould use H St bet we en lTth anci D0T iìoutes 30-38 and N2 and N4 would n o I ongen tenm i nate on in both äinections. Routes at the nonth side of the block but would tunn no nt frAve lTth St hav ins Bus $treet. the Pennsy I van ia the i r new downtown tenm i na I on traff ic wi contintlc to use this It is anticipated that only local short segment of H St and thus no bus lanes a ne recommended desP i te mð l t the substantial tnansit movements' Fannagut Squane buses would continue to use their present I terminal on tÀ; ".=t side of Connecticut Ave between H St and for fon this block or St in Model Two. No bus lane is recommended l1th St between I St and K St becuase. of anticipated modenate bus suggested fon ,rbiur".. ln udd¡t¡on, no non'Lhbound bus lane is of anticipated the of lTth St beiween I St and K St because lane i s "ãgr"ni moã"n.t" bus v,olumes. ln additioni no southbound bus H St lying to K St and =rés.=t"d for the segment of lTth St between thã-west and southwest of Farragut Square ' WMA ð nonthbound cunb bus lane is necommended for the one Stneet block pontion of this street segment extending nonth of I everl ing monn ing and to K Street. Th is lane wou ld ofierate in the ;ã"f¿ãy f""k *iln-no risht tunns; except fon buses¡ beins Pfovi{"9 and at K Street' Routes senved *oulá inclLde Dcr 40' 42' N2' N4 to ABitw I St in order f St buses. The lane is not recommended below al low nisht tunns fon cans onto this auto street The last non-Br¡s Stneet Segment ol- Model Two to be discussed and K Stneet' in this nepont is l}th Stneet between Constitution Aveincluding all Model Two suggests that a substantial numben of buses the l-95 bridges,gnd bound f or locations nonth AB ii W bus ".";=¡ns as DcT'- Routãs 50, 52t 53, 53, L3 be rerouted of the Mall, as well nonth unden the Mall via t.he l2th stneet Expne...=*a.Y:, All of these buses would continue on l2ür St unti I they neached the Pennsylvania Ave Bus Str;;;-"h;;e-they would make nisht on left, tunns dependins on thei r "ori. pattenn . ln onden to pnõv ide {'on the congest ion -ãç'ihese t-ruse s, Mode I Two tnans{'orms I 2th St between {'nee ro,r"rn"nt . street Const itut ion Ave ancl Penn.yirrun i. Ave into ù one-wav nonthboundAB Û the olcl segment. A taxi stancl "o, iå u" pto,ridecJ on the site'of such a step' west side tenminal ðneð ¡f trafFic concJitions wannant Ave Bus AB t+ W buses woulcl either terminate on the Pennsylvania Stneet Bus Street' Stneet or "¡r"ri'"i" nonth to tenminate on the Hbehind the old Post ñ;;;;; õi-S6,uòrl¿ continue to make thein looçr. tenminate at thein Off ice Build¡nõ at the f'oot of llth Street and St pnesent tenm¡nãt. Betrveen the Pennsylvania At: Bus Street and Kauto 'lZth St woulrJ lose its nontlrbound transit senvice and become an stneet. DCT Routes K, 8, Y, S would be nenouted via the I lth, l4th and F st Bus Streets and the Pennsylvania Ave Bus Stneet. Howeven, W �Smith lt5 This nepont now turns its attention to the six bus streets on() hrusway rn,lr iclr make up the centnal core of Model Two. The: and first k"y segment to be discussed is Model Two's K St Busway which The Btrsway, with two extends between 20th St and l4th Street. eastbound, uses the four lanes of K Sttscenter roadway. exceptions 0then vehicles use the four outen K St curb senv¡ce lanes. Vehicles using the Washington Cin cle Undenpass must be pnovided on opportun i ty to c i rcu l ate to and fr om the outen I anes of K St and 2lst and 20th Streets. ln onde nt o facilitate this cinculation need, the second model necommends the dividins zone between K Stneet's inner i¡nd outen lanes be nemoved between 2lst and 20th Stneets. ln addition, signals must be given time cycles which would allow night hand tunns onto 2lst and 20th Streets and a left hand tunn: at appropniate times of the day at 20th Stneet. A second bit of complex signalization will be needed at 20th Street. Routes D2' D4' L4, T2, N5, T7, T9 wi I I need to tunn nisht fnom the center noadway past the two outen I anes of tnaf,f i c north onto 20th Stneet. Many veh i c I es using ttre outer lanes wi ll wish to proceed toward the !{ash ington Cinc]e Undenpass. Adequate signal ization wi I I be needed to sepanate these c;onfl icting movements for the sake of tnaffic safety. Between 20th and lTth Streets, DCT Routes L4, D2, D4, T2, T7, Tg, N5, 32, 34 and WVM Routes 1r2,3,4,5,617,11 would use the K Stneet Buswtry. lt is necommended that DCT bus stops be located i n the west sect ion of the i nvo I ved b locks, and vfVM bus stops be located in the east sections of the involved blocks. ln this waY, buses wi I I be mone I ikely to pass other transit vehicles stopped to service pð¡ssengens quickly and easily. Taxis would be ablt to use this brsway sgãment'.*..pt 7:00 am - 9:30 am and 4:00 pm - 6:30 pmr Monday - Fniday. lntencity and airpont buses would have full time use oî the K St Buswõ¡y. lt is important that bus shelters be designed to f it in the dividing bannier which would provide the sites fon K St bus "itops. These sheltens must protect transit patrons from vehicles using K Stneet's outer lanes. A¡l sheltens associated with Busway on Bus Street operations_should be I ighted and strategic sheltens should also have heating. (A map of the K St Busway can be f ound in F igure B of' the Appenc ix. ) At Connecticut Ave, al l Fannagut Squane buses of the AB t/ W System wou I <J enter the K St Busway and proceed eastbound over the fåci I ity to l4th Street. At lTth St, al I Fanragut Squane buses of the WMA System would enter the K St Busway and proceed eastbound over the f'acility to l4tlr Stneet. ln addition, DCT Routes Ll, L2, L7, L9, Q5, 05 would use the Busway in both directioirs between Connecticut Ave and I 4th Street. North of Fannagut Squane, K loses its dividing bannier between eastbound lanes. The same situation occurs at McPhenson Square. ln both cases the cunb lane on these two blocks eastbound would be given oven to ful I time non-transit use and the lane adjacent to the curb (centen lane) would be given oven to full time tnarrsit use. Obviously, no bus stops could be pnovided eastbound in these two blocks. �Smith il6 gne last. bit of sisnalization will be needed to nender the K St Busway wonkable. At; l4th St, a substantial number of eastbound-buses wi tl n".d to tunn south fnom the centen noadway onto the l4th St Bus Street. ln addition, õ¡ numben of autos would be continuing eastbound fnom the outen lanes of K St towand l3th Stneet. ln Model Oner the readen môy nemember., this movement was impossible. Howeven, with adequate signal tiininS, Moderl Two assumes both bus and auto movements would be safe and should be ai lowed. Patnons of thei K st Busway wi I I be able to tnansfer to Metno tra i ns conven i ent I y at the Fannagut Nonth Stat i on. An eesy wa I k (a short block of õ¡pproximåtely 300 feejt) will allow transfens to and from tra i ns at the Fanragut West and l5th I l4th Stneet Metno Stations. No redesign of'the noadway configunation for bus stneet operation is suggested fon ãt," K St Busway. The {'oun lane f onmat a I lows one lane in dinection fon passing. 0n widen streets the centnal. openational "aðñ constraint becomes the amount of avai lable cunb space to be used fon bu-=-=top=. Situations in rvhich too many buses f isht for too little cunb apt .o produce time delays which detnact from the overal =fu"" u"" imbact ol- bus st-ncets. This issue will be covened in gneater pbsitive betai I in the ai scussions concenning the six Bus Stneets. A distinct method of icjentif ication will be needed at all entnances to bus stneets. These devises would also be needed at al I intensections whene non-bus streets cnoss such bus pnionity faci I it ic:s. Lange i<Jentif ication signs complimented by f lashing lights could be usecl. ln acJdiNeedless to saY: tion, a =y=i"r of' þavement *urking "orld be utilized, enl.oncement shou ld be s1;n ict ond 6ackecl by aclequate I e5¡ i s lat ion . F ines fon violations should be at least twenty five dollans per offense. The H St Bus Stneet extends between lTth St and l4th Street' (A Map of the H St Bus Street can be found in Figune 8 of the Appendix.) The stneet is a f ive lane {'aci lity with three lanes nunning west and two lanes nunning east.. This I'ormat. is especially convenient because considenably ro"* buse.s will be moving westbound via the.H St^ Bus. Stneet: i..., ABfiW and WVM buses use the stneet westbound rvhile using the K St Bu=,uåy eastboun<1. Cont inu ins the f ormat estab I i shed by tf e K S! Busway, DC Trånsit bus stops would b¿ located in the eastenn ¡>ontions of the involvecj blocks an'<l ABiiW and VrIMA stops in the westenn segments' Again, bris sheltens ane a necessity and heated sheltens should be pnovided at stnateg i c po ints. A pn ime const:ra int on bus street openat ions becontes the amount of available cunb space. W¡th mðny lanes avõ¡ilable ton tlre movc)ment of' busers, congest- ion wou ld not be a pnob lem ¡ I' veh ic les d ¡d not have to service pui=,rngers at bus stops. Howeven, congestion and connesponding '¡f vehicles pile up in a p.rracJ<: seeking to loss of i¡n,* ,lõ*s not vanish senvç cr common bus stop. One solution to this pnoblem is to prov.i cle bus along the involved blocks' stops l.on ditfenent routes at different.sites stnategy has alneiarJy been advocated via thc strsJgestion that DC This Transit busãs stop in th; eastern pontions of the involved blocks and subunban bus stops in the western pontion of the same blocks' an except iona I I v lang<; How:even, th i s stnategy b"g ins to .breakdown whPn i¡^;-áóã"" for throt¡sh iñ; number or bus noutes are f;i;;I o., å uu='Jt"JJå;. I �Smlth - 117 passlng movements remalns completely adequate. .However, a vÍ-gorous r;l,rugg1e for curb spã"o,t,r: servlce pa.ssengers ITìay develop. Thjs report bel-ieves orlglnally have tilerä,j.s a. solution to tr,is problem on all bus streets r¡¡h-ichmore lanes into amore involves transforming one or than four lanes. The sol-uLion páu""ngur ís1and. When this step is accornrr.lished curb space available for the the case of H St it is lervin[ of passengers cari begneatly increasedJninto a pa-ssenger lsland lane be convertecl recommãnoed the tñ1r0, or center 14th St anci f6tfr Street. The diagrarn on the next page portrays this ilñã Lanes l and 2, counting from the present north curb, woul-d be one way ;ñ. westbound. They *o.,íd serve á]-1 nga\d and \¡,T¡A buses.In aSdition,Dtf Foutes. Sã;"ã3;SÀ, St;"SA arro 40, 4z would use these two lanes westbowrd. The thlrd Foutes J0, lane would be thå pàru"ngá* island. Iane four would serve DCTeastbound 16, fifth lane urould carry all ãg,-Aô, 82, 84, B6'westbóunc1. The ' fowth use f i n,.,u"". It is antlcipated that eastbound buses coul-d afsowoul-dthe using be moderate amount of vehricles i;""; ã passlng lane a.s only a the lane westbound S. Tyre passenger lslanri stratery would termjnate at 16th St because DCT Between 16th St and 17th St bhe present thrree Routes twn north at this street. jane westbound tv¡o lane eastbound configuratlon woul-d continue to prev?il. The rnidcìle lane could, however, serve as a 1ay over area f,or hlMA and AB&1{ buses. rnovementrt it.nd of the H St Bus Street wj-l1 mean the loss of 4Ç mgtered garage on*street parking spaces. In addition, the entrance to onet4nderg¡o-und east of t5th S#;et; ï¡111 be blocked. This garage has a capaclty of 98 garP. A new entrance to trrls faclltty would be costly but the posslbility should be urpror"a. However, the trade ôf approxlmately 150 parking spaces for the estâbllshment of a bus ¡;treet would reprãsent a substantial overall galn for downtov¡n The estabtishnrent Irlashington. A clescription other bus priðrity routlngs for the H St Bus Street and all stratéÃi"" in the CBD can be found ln Table I of the Appenciix. of suggest,ed bus 'Ihls l4th St Bus Street will extend from K St to Pennsylvania Avenue.1sl-ands. the creation of passenper 1s a six lane street suitable for redesi-g¡r via nefueen K St and H St the flow of buses on the 14th St Bus Street wJ 11 be this street would largely southbound. AB&\^/ and 1¡iTvlA Farrazut Square busesappliesuse DCT routes to statenrent ;;d;i in a southbourd direction. The Same passenger island would be located fá'i ;¡U, \2, N5 anoung 'others. Thus, the new in the manner most sùitable to serving southbor.rnd bus rovenents. rt is suggested that the west curb lane of K st, lane one, ffid lane two sen/e southbound buses. The I-ane two would function as a southbound passlng,/thrrough 1*9,._ The thlrd lane r¡¡ould be converted i,nto a passenger island. Iane four would also fimction as a southbot.rnd lane serving bus stops located on the passenger lsland. The east curb lane would sen/e northbound buses, prlmarily DCT 50rs routes. lane 5, acijacent to the east curb lane, would serve as a-passine lane for the northbound buäes using 1ane sj-x and the sóuthbound buses using lane fow. Again, heated, lane lighted buä shel-ters should be strategically located. A sample southbound12 DCT ròutes L2, L\ ,r. a.llocation coul-d witness AB&I¡I and WVIA buses along wlth ñlr:l,li using lanes one'ancl ti^io. DCT routes 50, 52' 53, 14 southLrorrnr,r would '¡7l be a"ssigned to lane fou:: to two off street parklng facllltles serving approximately 120 cars woul_d be lost to these two blocks of the 14th St Bus Street. Alternate ån1iã".rs from other streets via existing alleys are' howeverr âvâilable. The entrances �Smlth Dtagran I Deslgn of H -Ll6 Street Bt¡e Street LAth $tneet F t- u rr u ô v) t-U ô I I I 1 ts Þ t tO '\9 i-l s 15th Sùreet .i¡: +9) o' n- ro jf vt vt u-l o t- t- u ô @ $ o \9 ó r¡ì- tu ô o Hl. ä: m gt h 1l (ô gE ,E b,ã ôi I lô Ð t- \, ô út Madl son rPlace a¡ t- I I d r t- I u, \ f- u A E (ô 16th ötneet Bus Stop t- SETBE u <-=+ ô I He I ì + ú l'l' lr ù ç 1 Avenue {f¡ ) ô tl n J n ã I rÐ ated/Llghted 5 1 L Connectl eut a t-' ìJ ô $heL ter �Snúth - 119 St and F St the 14th Slt Brs Street w111 aarry a. conslrler:ably of rrorthbounri vehlcles than the street sepynent,just <lj;r:rlssed \,rtMA buses wil-.1 be conveyecl botti northbor.¡nd anci southbound. In ãs AB&W ¿rnci acidibLon a s;ubstant;ial number of buses w111 be carrled to and from this street sepgnent vla the H St Bu^s Street. Therefore, between H St and ltlew York Ave the 14th St Bus Street would have three lanes northbound and three lanes southbound with no passenger i.slanrls. Ttris stratery would most effectlvely handle the turning movernents to and from the H St Bus Street. No southbound bus stops woul-d be provided j.n this one block segment. Northbound only DCT routes 50, 52, 53, 54 would be served by curbslde bus stops as nnst other,buses would be turning left onto F[ Street. Between H ffeabe¡ vol-ume St a passenger isl-and r¡¡oul-d once again with lane one, west curb lane, and lane two set aside for appear in lane three sôutn¡ounO buses. Lane four would serve southbound passenger island bus stons. Lane six would cater to northbound buses while lane five would be a passlng lane for lanes four and six. Thls wjJ-l make curb space for northbound buses scarce Betv¡een llew York Avenue and G York Ave and G Street. Thus DCT routes 50-54 would not have a stop in this block. They would be servlced by stops north of New York Avenue and south of G Street. Thus these buses woul-d prlmarl-}y use the northbound passing lane, the fifth 1ane, and f?ee northbor-urd ct¡rb space for other routes. Heatedo lighted bus shelters would be especially suitable to this one block segnent as a substantial a¡'rount of passerger usage of the involved bus stops can be anticipated. between I'Tew woul-d once again revert to a three lane northbound three lane southbotmd configr.rration with no passenger islands. Thls v¡ould allow for convenlent turning rnr¡vements to and from the F Between G St and F St the 14th St Bus Street St Bus Street. Northbound, only DCT Routes 50-51+ would have bus stops in thls block. Southbound stops would be available for all DCT Routes contlnulng south on 14th St, below F'St, but not for suburban buses. No off-street parkj-ng entrances will be lost to tne 14th St Bus Street between H St and F Street. The one bl-ock segrnent of the 14th St Bus Street between I' St and Perrnsylvanla Ave wíll see an equallzatlon of cllrectlonal volume f1ows, In this case, approxirnately the same nunber of buses w111 be using the street norbhbound as southbound. This, qituation 1s caused by Model Thors downtov¡'n loop strategi for certain rr:utes entering the CBD fþom the west. Ttrese routes, lncludlng A2-AB, would follor¡r a Pennsylvanj-a Ave - 14th St * F Street loop pattern. Ttrua, the passenger ls1and for this one block segment would be moved to lane four. Lane six, east curb lane, would serve northbowrd buses and curb lane bus stops, Lane five would serve as a passirg lane f'or nprbhbound buses. Iene three would convey northbound buses and serve passenger lsland bus stops. Iane one, west curb lane, woul-d ccnvey southbound buses, ffid lane two would serve as a passlng lane for southbound anrl northbound buses. An entranee to one off-street parklng facility wou]d be lost vla thls segment of the 14th St E"rs Street. Between 14th St and 12th Street the F St Bus Street woutd have an unique lane conflguration. There are two westbotmd lanes, a mall-like eenter buffer area and two eaStbound lanes, The larger volunre flow of buses for thls two block segrnent would be eastbound. It ls proposed that no, alterations be made to thls street segment for bus street orperations. The two eastbound lanes would offer the capaclty for a curb bus stop lane and a passlng l-ane. Ttre same staterent applies to the two westbound lanes. It is lnportant that heated, lighted bus shelters be provÍded for the F St Bus Street at 12th Street. Th1á polnt �Smith 120 would be a major location f o n i ntenmoda tnansfers. Passengers would tnansfen between buses and t nains senving the Distnict's majon rapid nai I stop, Metro Centen. I Between l2th Street and 7tn St, F St has slx lanes available for the dictates of bus street design. Between Jzth St and llth St a three lane eastbound, thnee lane westbound configuration is suggested. The lack of a passengen island means only cunbside bus stops be provided. Because of'the minute lenght of this block these "orl¿ should only senve stops DCT routes 40 and 42. The three-thnee lane design is necommended in order to facil itate turns to and from the l¡th St Bus Street. Between llth St and 7t¡'¡ St the F St Bus Street wil.l cônny considerably more vehícles eastbound than westbound. (Suggested noutlngs cõ¡n be found in Table One of the Appendix.) Thus, it i= suggested õh.t only lane one' nonth cunb lane, senve westbound buses exclusively. This stnategy foresees the convenstion of lane four into ô pu=".ng"r island. Lane six, south cunb lane, would serve eastbound curb bus stops while lane five would become a passing lane for eastbound buses. Lane thnee would senve eastbound bus stops located on the rrear passengen island. The second lane would serve as a passing lane for eastbound and westbound buses. The loss of panking spðces via the F St Bus Street would be minima! consisting largely of on-street panking metens. The llth St Bus Stneet stnetches, in Model Two, between K St and Pennsylvania Avenue. Six lanes are avai lable fon Bus Stneet nedesign. A"ma*fror intencity bus faci I ity, the Gneyhound Bus TenminaI, is located on the west side of the stneet just south of New York Avenue. Much higher nonthbound bus volumes will be witnessed on the segment of the Bus Street lying north of F Stneet. Between New York Ave/l St and K St, not only will mone buses be using I lth St nonthbound bus most buses wi ll need to tunn left onto K St. Because of th is situation a unique location is suggested for the needed nonthbound passengen island. Lane one, west cunb lane, wi I I serve southbound buses and curb bus lanes. The second lane would be a southbound passing lane. Lane six, east curb lane¡ would senve nonthbound buses tunning right on K St to reach 9th Stneet. This lane would have modenate bus volumeÀ and not be bondered by an adjacent nonthbound passing lane. The f ifth lcrñe would instead be transfonmed into a passenger islãnd Lane foun would canny nonthbound buses and serve passenger island bus sto¡rs. Buses using these stops would eithen continue nonth on I lth St above K St on turn left at K Street. The thind lane would serve as passing tunning lane fon nonthbound buses. The I lth St Bus Stneet would be subject to a thnee lane nonthbound, three lane southbound configuration betwáen New Yonk Ave and H Street. The neôson fon this tnansfonmation is a desire for favonable impact on the operations of tlre Greyhound Bus Terminat. lt is assumed the west cunb lane, lane one, will continue to be used fon the storage of Greyhound buses. Lanes two and three would be used for southbound thnough movements by tnansit and intencity buses. Lanes foun, five, and six wou ld serve nonthbound bu ses w ith the s íxth lane ..ru-ing "u"b. ¡d" bus stops. These stops would only be used by DCT buses in this block. é¡ �Smith t2t H St and G St a passenger island wot¡ld again be estalrl ishetJ buses ancl on the I lth St Bus Street. Th is i sland wou ld serve northbot¡nd bus stops, Lane six would senve nonthbound curb b; located in lane foun. passing lane. The thind while lane five would function as a northboundon the passenger island. bus stops located ï.n" would serve nonthboùnd Sðrif,rU"rn¿ lane one, the west cunb lane, would cater to,senving curb bus ;¿;p; whi le lane two would function as ð passing lane fon nonthbound and Between southbound buses. The passengen i sland would once again disappean from I lth St between G St and F St. A thnee lane nonthbound, three lane southbound configto and from iI unation would agoin be seen in onden to fac bei tate movements both sides establ ished on the F St Bus Stneet. Cunb bus stops would of I lth St fon the block being d i scussed. Bus patnons us ing the I lth St Bus Stneet rvou ld have conven ient access to.tnansfers to and from napid nai I tnains at Metro Centen. TheneFone,F heated-l ishted b us sheltens ône é¡ "must" fon Ilth St between H St and Street. Nonthbound buses would again have the benefit of ð¡ pô¡ssengen island between F St and Pennsylvania Ave. As was the côse fon the block lying between G St and H St this island would be located in the founth lane. Lanes three, five and six would senve nonthbound buses. Lane one would vaniation ;;;"; soutlrbound buses and cunb bus stops. 0ne minor a pass-ing would, lane for Lane two would only senve e¡s b" in effect. hð".,r.r, buses and thus would be off -limits to nonthbound buses "o"ttlU"ú"a The entnances to three off-street parking faci I ities would be lost the operation of the llth St Bus Street. All of these facilities via street and two ane entrances to mgjor parking are on the west side of the .'f over 300 cans. The third facility is a g.r.9.= which senve a total can be served f rom lzth Street . A ltennate entnances shou ld Tðt ñtr ¡"1", Bus Stneet be sòusht fon the g€rnages but mishL prove costly. . The llth St in Model adverã. eñfect on panking of any of the segments has thð most Luã,= bus pnionity coFe. Howeven, this nepont bglieves that even this downtown tnanstnade-off r".,r.sents an ovenal I gain in the qual ity-ofalso be lost via the entnance to one senvice station will The p""iut¡"n. iitn St Bus Stneet. This faci lity could however, be senved via New Yonk A venue The 7th St Bus Stneet will stnetch between Pennsylvania Ave and lndependence Ave. lt wi I I canny a sl ightly larger.volume of southbound bu=.=. Between Pennsylvania Ave and Constitution Ave and between Madison Dnive and ln<Je¡rend"n"L Ave passenger islands would be established. No ì=iond is plannerd betwcen Constitution Ave and Madison Place. The buses. i=i"n¿= *olld contain bus stops serving southboun<l DCTon y. NoLane' one, adjacent I wot.¡ I cl serve southbound ABÛW buses the wr:st curb lane, lated except f 9t the one b lock segment stnetch ing ¡^g lane i s cont,emp b"t"".ñ Constitution Ave.rnd Madison Place. Lane f ive is seen as the ',u== home of new passengen islands. The fourth lane would serve southbound bus stops conained*o'n these islands. The third lane would senve ôs a p..rinSTthnough lane fon southbound buses. Lanes one and two would be �Sm ñth 122 home of' nonthbound buse:s with the f inst lane scrving cunbside bus stops and the second {'unctioning as a passing lane. An entnance to a parking lot on the east side of 7th St would be sôcrif iced to the 7tV-, St Bus Stneet. Thís lot could be easily senved via 6ttr St and/or Jef f enson Dn ive. ln addit ion, entrances to undenground panking faci I ities located beneath the Anchives and the Fedenal Tnade tlre ^ LOmmlSSlOn ic nOilL OÍl aLl lLil This nepont necommends ôr öI L r .¡ :-uelWtreiì fl rer-liisyiVAir¡c¡ I LIL r:^, aiitü viJnSIiIUIiOiì ^^-- ,t ¡rVeilUei5. a special stnategy ín this unique case. Vehicles would be given ð neadily visable type of ídenti'using these facilities fication and be allowed to üse 7tn St to enten on leave these entnances at al I times. Al ¡ other cans would, of counse, be banned. Bus patnons using tt're 7tn St Bus Stat ion could transf en to and f nom napid nail tnains at Metno's 7tn St and Pennsylvania Ave Station. This statement sssumes curnent f inancial problems of the rapid rail system will be solved and this station will actually be built. to be discussed The last bus priority segment of Model Two I extend between the Pennsylvania Ave Bus Stneet. Thi s faci itv t4 th St and 7tn Street. Adequate signalization will e needed at both At Pennsylvania Ave and 7tt't St, buses wi I I be en ds of this bus street. ln addition, ma king a lange vaniety of turning and thnough movement s. to contno I I ing these movements the s igna I s f ound at tltn is intersection wi I I need to al lorv cdns to tnavel between Pennsylvania Ave east of Tttt St and 7th St nonth of Pennsylvanía Ave. ln addition signal ization wi I I be needed which wí I I al low cars to tnavel between Sttr St and lndiana Ave over the short one block segment lyins -iust north of the lt is also necommended that cans flowing westbound Hancock Statue. fnom lndiana Ave be able to reach 9th St fon the punpose ol'making northbound n iglrt turns IS I At the west end of the bus stneet adequate signal ization wi I I be needed at the intersection of Pennsylvania Ave and l4th Stneet. These signals wi I I need to contnol bus movements between the l4th St and Pennsylvania Ave Bus Stneets, ln addition othen vehicles will be allowed to flow between l4th St south of Pennsylvania Ave and Pennsylvania Ave west of l4th St. Tnaff ic using E St will not be penmitted to use any pontion of Pennsylvania'Ave east of l4th Street. The pnesent lane configunation of Pennsylvania Ave mqkês.a lange of nedesign options possible fon bus stneet operations. Pennsy¡vania Ave between l4th St and 7tn St is one of the widest streets in Washington. 1t contains foun lanes eastbound and foun lanes westbound numben as well as ó¡ centen buff en anea of approximately one lane's width. diagnam of the bus street design about to be discussed can be found the fo I I ow i ng pð9e. A on It is proposed that two passenger islands be constnucted on Pennsylvania Ave between f St and lzth St and between llth St and 7th Street. No passengen islands would exist between lzth St and llth Street. The utility bf =r"ñ islands would be limited by the pnesence of an ABf/W tenminal aneâ lyirlg in a tniangular area just south of Pennsylvania Ave in this block. �Smith - 123 Diaçlram 2 Design of Pennsylvania Avenue Bus Street - J 7th St. Pennsyl van ía Avenue JL/ L I I I I Btlr st. I tt I V,I , tt I l¡ 9th St " t¡ tt I I I I t¡ I l¡ t I , I , I, I orh st. I lrh sr. )Y;,fl,' l,,I jl, lzth st. .l ll ,l t I l tl I r t, 8l I ,"t, I tl ¡l t t t lt I I ,\ ^' iffi,[ DCR It | I I t E St. t I a 3rh st. M,{ l¡ ,,,fl, - Ð.C. lranelt ntsh hour routes to and from State Depantnent Aree 1; I note: bus stops are noted by route numbers T - termtnaL polnt E St. l4th St. �Smith t24 Fon those blocks containing the two pÉ¡ssenger islands the following layout is suggested. Lane one, the north curb lane, would serve.westbound buses and curbside bus stops. The second lane would function ôs a passing lane for westbound buses. A passengen island is suggested fon lane thnee. The fourtlr lone would cater to westbound buses serving pôssengen island bus stops. The present center buffer zone would become a r.vonking lane and caten to passing movements of eastbound and westbound buses. The sixth iane is scheduieci for tnansformation into a pðssengen island whose eastbound bus stops would be senved by lane f ive'. Lane eight woulcl serve eastbound buses and curb bus stops while the seventh lane would tunction õ¡s a passing lane. With this <:onf igunation in ef f ect, Pennsylvania Ave coul<J provide speedy bus senvice for c¡ ldnge vaniety of bus routes. Tnansfens tç fnom rapid rail trains would be possible at the 7tn St and Pennsylvania 9nd Ave Station and the l?th St Station south of: PennsyIvania Ave. Thecomtont o{'bus patnons at these vital points must be assured via heated/ l ighted bus shelters. No buses would terminate at the foot of l3th St at the pnesent L2, L4, N.5, J6, etc. tenminal. lnstead, all buses, except thnough routes such as DCT 30-38, would tenminate at designated zones establ ished on the Pennsylvania Ave Bus Street. An entranðe to one panking lot on blre nonth side of Pennsylvania Ave between l'zth and l3th Sl,neets would be lost. lt appeans €¡nrangements could be made to have this lot senved via E Stneet Tl-re amount ol' time saved by buses in the CBD will depend on the portion o{' thein nr¡utes pnotected by bus stneets. Many buses wi ll be orì bus stneets fon the: entirc dunation of their.journey thnough Washi nç¡ton's cone. D"pend ing on the part icu lar noute stnucture, ctre amount o{' timc scìved should nðnge f rom between 5 to l5 minutes. This concludes our discussion of Model Two's. strategies for Washington's ccntral cone. The final task remaining is a diecussion of tlrer conclusions which can be drawn from the concepts and models wh ich have been exp lorerd in tlr i s report. �Smith 125 Section lll: Conclusions This neport has not been a technical study blessed by the partic¡pgtion.of a great numben of expents from such fields as tnaffic engrneerrng or urban planning. As ð nesult thene ane ê gneat mðny , things which ¡t def initely does not pnove. First, it does not pnove that the two mode I s cJeve loped erne tfre best poss ib I e work ing concepts for downtown bus pnionity systems. Given the inherent mênpowen restnaints .govennins this effont such a goal would be gnieviously unrealistic. Second, ¡t does not prQve that some of the strategies suggested would not in the long run pnove overly detrimental to centain forms of downtown tnansportat i on such as the pr i vate automob i I e. Th i rd , it docs not pnove that bus prionity systems including bus streets would be the most national ancJ eff icient solution to revensing the negative tide of congestion which trips the core of'our Nation'ã CapitaÍ. Howt--ven, the authon feels one impontant task has del'initely beren accornplished. lt is possible to take the heart of a majon Amenicon city and cne.ate fnom that core not one but two broad bus priority systems. ln addition, there ane substantial reasons to bel ieve that these systems while not without pnoblems or need of alterations ane at least wonkable. The site for the development of these stnategies was Washington D.C. but the total namif ications extend to many other cities. The downtown õ¡nea of oun Nat ion 's Cap ita I possessie= .nyth i ng but a regu lar nectangu lar stneet pattern. lnsteadr wê find traffic circles; lange uniquely the Mall, a haphazard shaped blocks housing government facilities, pattenn of off-stneet parking developments, streets ol widel y vanying lane capacity, angufar stneet intersections, traffic underpasses and a semi-completed system of high speed roads. lf ei bus pniority plan cðn be designed for,downtownl ltlashington ¡t cõ¡n be designed for the core of any Amenican city Centain principIers discussed in Section I of this neport govern the genenðtion of these str.rtegies. lt is felt tlre models pnesented in Section I I basical ly meet the requirements of these goals. Therefore, the models rJo possess a degnee of validity and cannot be dismissed lishtly despite the need fon more back-up studies of a technical natune. Let us review these goals and see what degnee of compatibility with the advocated pninciples has been obtained. ïhe finst goal was to incnease the people cannying capacity of Both mode|s meet the spirit if not the downtown District streets. ,. letten of th i s goa I dur.ing the ir f irst stage of ex i stence. The methodology of this neport utilized existing bus volumes for the design of its bus prionity stnategies. Thus, we find that some of the bus lanes , suggested will initially carry less than sixty buses per hours of operation. 0n the other hand: othen lanes will in,i.tially carry oven 100 buses pen peak houn (f St, Pennsylvania Ave). This'means- the immediate effect of putting the lanes into operation will not be a greaten vo¡ume of people moving efficiently oven downtown stneets.as the same volume of bus movements will initially be in effect. Howeverí the potential people cannying capacity of these stneets wi I I be great I y increased. Al I of the lanes could handle at least 150-180 buses per hour without d¡fficulty. �Smith t26 speedy, eff icient This meôns a substantial increase in pä.""ng.t volumes t¡ransit senvlce will show healthv will be pos=¡Ui". lt i" .r,i¡cipated truly competitive with gains as bus ó.iority plans t.kl pybl'ic.tnañsit increased to meet this the automcbi l;. Bus'vblumes wi I I be able to be prionity lanes^and the the côpacity of the new demand *¡ihori-rt".ininõ u s"ådr.l gain in the p"opl. galrying capacity of the result will bã -TÀu=, tñe implementatíon of bus priority strategies inrun!.yecl =tr'"ãt. t- ¡;;';ased postnt ial fon the eff icient ;'iiï';î;"-1^¡;=ñi.n.å^-"'g""uti ro,ru*ðnt of langen vo lumes of peop le ' what has been said in nelation to bus lanes appli"" t9 an even greaten extent for bus stneets. ln most cases these facilities will peak .periods' initiaI Iy "."iy' f bO:ãõO-bu=ã= per.hour .pen dinection in should be able -h;;;-p9; W¡th passing'lån." and pa=="ÀU!r islands these streets direction with ease' vehicles per to accomodate at least 300 will not strain the Thus, substantial expansion'À'f rush'horr-"""i¡"" houns th9 abi.l itv. to ln off -peak ,;p;ú¡i¡ti"= ot-glã=ã l."ilities. tnansit vehicles will alsb be substantial despite the absonb additional by t.rlk= ånd taxis. Thus, tll" ultimate people ;;;-;i ;h; i""ilit¡es The carrying capacity of downtown streets wi I I witness large gains'.bus lanes of on the effect ;;;;¿ *ån;i[J" ót this sain dependsof coursewords, how many f9T"." cðrs total autõ,rolurls: in other and stneets on be woul'd be within Washington's core on the average and what would constnuct aütempted.to thein eventual load factor. This repont häs',notbefore national impletask must be accomplished. ;;;h'u-,nðJ"i brt iÀ¡. ;;;;";¡ä^-ãç ã^r total bus prionity system can besin. lgt:l of promot¡on of The seconcl goal to be met is the 'and.9pe99.. a higher of f reguency The issue tnansit service in tenms of f requency A subståntiallv highen numb91 of buses, h;;;ir"uay uããn J¡*"ussed. direction ;;;";å¡^õ-iof"":" r ËoØ-ãu""". p"".gnl volumes per,h:rt, the bus priority in of being serviced by P"n p"ÀL õ.rî"á=, wili tr" capab'le stnategies =rsõ".ted-by th. t*o modelã. Furthenmore¡ anticipated patronmake frequency increases mandatory' a9e sains *¡ ii";;;u"Uií Large gains in tnavel time are also to be expected' The author has estimates used a =or"*nåï-.irpi¡=t¡" method of anriving at th? time savingdeterm ined Pn"=enã trave l t imes h,ene wh ich ¡ave been use<J in th ¡ ;-;;;ort. by actual bus journeys "" Qv..-!trdy of bus timetable's. Anticipated bus oversuggested travel times wene estimated by taking practice runsnuns were made bus the in oin'can' These prionity rout;; ;sinS the authon's and s imu lated stops to ã,r"n ing hour s when no congest ion was .pnesent service inr.rginary pu"t"ng."" we¡"e mad'e. Fortunately onlookers wepe scé¡rce, but p"ð6åfrit=b";îldãned. The time savins estimates gathered estimations' vio tlrcse means are nough t rt probaf'rly fairly.goõd needed before Mone any i¡r" "aiing= will be detailecl =t.uJicrs of potántial br= p"ionity systems can be implemented' Given the constraints of the methodology, the following tnansit time savings ôre to be expected in the cone-ãt"u via the implementation of Model Two: Buses tnavel ing over the tota I I ength of the 7tn St Bus Street ¡) duning peak houro: - Pnesent 2 ' 4 ninutesr anticipated I - 2 minutes: expected sav i ng I -2 mi nutes ' �Smith t27 2) Buses tnave,l ing over the total I ength of the F St Bus Stneet dun ng peak houns: present 3-7 m i nutes¡ anticipated 2-3 minutes, expected saving l-4 minutes. 3) Buses tnavel ing oven the total length of the Fennsylvani.a Ave Bus Street: during peak houns 3-7 minutes, anticipated 2-4 minutes, " expected sav i ng I -3 m i nutes. 4) Buses tnavel ing oven the tota lensth of the llth St Bus Stnget: dur i ng peak hou NS 3-8 m i nutes, anticipated 2-4 ninutes, expected sav l ng | -4 ni nutes. 5) Buses tnavel ing oven the total length of the. l4th St Bus Stneet: duning peak houns 3-7 m i nutes, anticipated 2-4 m i nutes, expected savi ng l-3 minutes. 6) Buses travel ing oven the entire length of the H St Bus Stneet ( lncludes panallel segment of Pennsylvania Ave ancJ tinre adjustment fon extension to 14th St): duning peak-houns 2-5 minutes, anticipated 2-3 m i nut€s¡ expected sav i ng O-2 m inutes. 7) Buses travel i ng o ven the ent i ne I ength of the K St Busway: duning peak houns 4-l 2 minutes, anticipated 2-5 m i nutes, expected savings 2-7 minutes. It can be expected tha! tt" typical bus proceeding thnough the downtown are€¡ via Model Two's Bus Street System will =ãu" a mînimum of 5 minutes and in times of ve?y severe congestion l5-20 minutes. Average time savings for such 9 through trip would be approximately 7- l0 minutes. Savings for tr i¡rs terminated in the CBD' would be of a similar mágnitude when one corìsidens the trip to and from the tenminal point to be compôrable to a thnough trip. The avene¡9e.tif" saving.for ô bus patnon would depend on the point he or she boanded the bus ond the vehicle's route pattern oven cone area bus prionity segments. Sophisticated modeling techniques will be needed to deLermine the ultimate time saving figures. However, it is probably safe to say that most ridens would save at least 3-10 minutes on the¡ CBD portions of their journeys ¡l'Model Two h/ere in operation. ln addition, they would save mone time on the bus pnionity segments leading to the central cone. Thus, a trip of more than thnee-miles duration to on ft'om the CBD would almost certainly consume l0 or more f ewer m inutes of the passenger 's t i_me. Jounneys present l y tak i ng 30"4o minutes would thus witness a 25% - 33% cut ir, tr.rr.l time Average time savings for Model One are expected to be of similan 'mágnitude on norma! peak periods. However, in times of especial ly sevene congestion ¡t is d¡fficult to imagine the system of bus lanes Ì'emôining inviolate even with dedicated enfoncement. Under these conditions the syste-m would probobly not be able to pnoduce its normal time savings. Bus street operations guarantee efficient bus service and protect low travel times even in õu".= where adjacent stneets are subject to extremely heavy congestion. The loweniÀs of tnavel times is ðpt to produce the patnon sunge which leads to greater bus volumes. Thus, i I �Smith t28 tnansit neinfoncement and growth wi I I be produced by the openat i on of bus pr i or ity systems. The thind goal to be met was the provision oF nel advantages fon bus tnavel wlrich wo''ld help attract a significently higher number of patnons to this mode¡ and to impnov'e the competitive position of ïransit bus senvice in "elation to the pnivate automobile. The advantages of lowen travel time and pnobable incneased senvice frequencies l:ðve already been discussed. Both of these new transit strengths are bound to =ig^ificantly impnove its competitive position in relation to the automõbile. lnäeed', in"""used tnavel time and mone expensive panking fees seem to be the Future destined fon the tin and chnome favonites of Detro ít i n oun loca I metno¡'ro I itan aneô . Yet, the bus pr ior ity systems promise even more in the way of increased bus attractiveness. The netwonk of bus shelters recommended will make the diminished waiting time for a transit vehicle a more comfortable experience. Bus *neets and lanes will,channel vehicles into close-lying service zones making transfens between routes easien. ln addition¡ these bus pniority segments are located at on very close to all major downtown Metro stations. This will lead to convånient transfers 6"tween buses and napid rail tnains. A1l these advantages should be lurthen reinforced by public financiaI support fon bus senvice leading to lower transit fares. ln this type of publ ic tnanspontation environment the automobi le would be likelV'to betomo the undLndos. lf this tnend devglops and outo usage could be cunbed ð valuable assisrt would be given to the goal of pro,riding and maintaining cleaner ain in downtown Washington Anothen goa I d iscussed in Section I ¡las providins downtown commencðneas with a level.of public transpo¡tat¡on sufficient to promote ial substantial economic vital ity. The downtown anea cannot possibly compete with outlying shopping centers in the battle of pnoviding free or even low cost p.rÈing spaces. Trying to compete with shopping centers.by promoting cor rãag. in Washington's cone i:. futile strategy akin to ä9r""ing to {'ight a <Jual with your opponent's r{teapons. lt is a battlc *h¡"h cånnot be h/on. Howeven, the adoptation of the bus priority systems suggestecl in this re¡rort neF)nesents a winning stragegy; the promotion of--ãhe CBD's unique advantage over outlying commercial areas, a <Jense tnansit network. The workiÃS concept is to make going.to downtown via bus as or more convenient than patnonizing t¡ shopping centen via car. Befone expressing doubts about the sanity of this stnatesY¡ visit a majon shopping centen on a peak day via car: good luck! Both models contain a netwonk of bus routes which come within one block in most cases and two blocks in a few cases, of all major downtown activity cent€)ns. ln many instances¡ a bus prionity seglelt. is quite I iteraliy locatecJ at the iront door of a commencial establ ishment. W¡th service ancj access of this type the can t'ruly becomes a luxunyrnot a necess ity I'on the metropo I itan €¡neô res ident Very íèw parking spaces are affected by the bus prionity systems containeä in Models 0ne.and Two. ln the finst modelrcrossover permits could be issued on a cõ¡se by case proven need basis. Thus, the number of spë¡ces lost via blocked exits would be difficult to detenmine at th i s stage of ¡'r lann i ng. However, the f irm ðpp I icat ion of tb" proven nee<J priÀciple coulcl 6. a valuable tool in meeting the feguirement of' th<. lst Se,c-tion, 6th goal: to minimize the number of off -street Pgrki"g. *po.r*= which ru.t be icarved" out of the limited amount of valuable land a cincle o'F �Smirh - tZg available in downtown Washington Model Two'" Þrs stneets would be nesponsible ' only a modest number of downtown pu"king spaces. for the cuntailment of Less than 100 on metens would be lost and the entrancer to'less than l000 off-"tr."t stneet spðces would be closed. Many of tþe9e spaces could be by-.itãin.t. Thnee substant ia I p.nk ing gõ¡rôges wou ld howävã; -i;;" "ã"u"d ", entrances. cuËtai lment because of bus strelts, oi";¡ns"apprãrirut.ry 500 spaces in dangen. One or two new off-strået garaõ.."bn non-transit streets . couId, however, çompensate compIetely Èor ãt,i" 1o"". The f inal.two goals to be satisf ied are closely internelatecl: to sepanate mutua I lv annoying movements of differ¡nõ-typ""-ði' ;;hiiì" modes; t9 îÌt"!l ish a numben of convenient thnough noulã. ion automobiles which wou ld not have a.ny loca I transít movementã. ln both cases the model far exceeds the finst in its ab¡ f ¡ty to ;.4i"ïy-tñ"""-öã"i.. second Model 0ne wê¡nring modes must occu.py.the same stneets separated only ln þy lanè. d if.f erent iat ions - ln add'ii ¡on, veh ¡" i".-oih"r than buses f ind thEir" nisht tunn and cunb senvi.ce i;";h" "up.b¡ti¿¡;;-J¡;;;i"r,ã¡l' model, a mone ration'rr use- of ¿o""iðiÀ-;¿;;;;"rËåäå'¡" def initety second accompl ished. lt must be stneesed that tnuck u^d iu^í service would be a llowed on bus stneets durine h;;;" ;i rlack ,i¡i¡=ut¡on. This means all modal services other thañ those .qyppl ¡;J bt-;;Tuat" autos would stil be available most of the week. ln-i¿Jil¡on.r õrrì extensive network of transit-less ffi.stt'eets is prov¡d;J: Thóse wishing to brave the nigons of auto- drivíng wi'l I f ¡;d they can "¡tii"n"conveniently reach still .every ma jon centen of act i c ity in lrlash initon's core. if.,r"; - i;'åpp;;;. that the models suggr:sted are indeed viaË1e and-"aluubl" when measured in the I isht of this repont,s major goals. one task not.approa.ch.ed this..report was of implementing eithen Model þv on Modäl Twô.- the question of the cost 0ne ñ".tru¡nt ,u.-¿¡ splayed because of the complexities of this task. Hór.r.rr-" f.",ujon'iot.. on costs should be briefly discussed. Finsl, ão.t'can b* measuned in tyo wavs: the total numben of dol lans needeá to physi""i-l;-;;;;bl ish the svsterr¡ the over cost benefit ratio to Washilãtó" the systenr' Detenmirration of the f irst cost coulð U. of i*pt"r"ntlÃä easity accomplished via ë¡ technical stud¡'. lt would include such "ðrp"nã^;;-;.'"ãlãI fo, th.eltgf :, constnuction of passengen islands, pÀi"[-r"" lane *."Li.,g", identification signs, identificãtion I ight.r' puUi¡" education costs, nelocation of bus stops] tnáining of inforration .n¿ a";n;i;'ã¡¿ enforement pensonne I , compensat i on for' aåvense ly -ãfiect.d off-.t"""t lu* parkins openation, costs of desired new Ur"".r-å"ã ¿ñ;";;=;.'oË"rrnnin9 l.more fnequent service. Fnonkly, this repont áoes not pretend to know the.exact migniture of these cðsts. Howeven, ¡t is hand to believe the entire,system wíll cost mone than the oven 20 million-dðliÃr"-u'ñ¡1. costs 1'or new fneeway an'd ropid nail construction. Ítr. if,"Lõf.,t 'i'n this '' i nstance i s somewhat stassen'ins: un '"Ãt i;; t;;; !fÅntat ion system wh ich instal led for a ::tl_b" competíng modes. cost whlch is pnobabit-'¡---'ih.n-ô,.,ã"rliä "r two major Ïhe second.cost study, a cost benefit detenmination, would be far more complex and nepnesent 9 challenging study. The doliar values of the increasecJ benef its to the city.would-have to be and should be to the costs of installation plus the costs of def inl¿¿-hãrããt "ðmpar".l iõ"'to "nv I �Sm¡th _ 130 in<Jivi<lual ancJ conccnns. Centainty the problem of facton selection an<J quanti{=icatir¡n should kee¡'r a consulting f irm quite busy. pnioríty systems will face opposition. True, they repnesent fan higher levels of publ ic tnanspontation. Tnue, they repnesent a step in the dinection of national and scientific street uti I ization. Howlrr"r, the f inst factor(t ¡gt', levels of .public tnansportation) has only necently begun to gather strength in the halls of public policy. The second iactõn (rationrl street utilization) f-on the most pant nemains in pne-embnyonic limbo. !r/e still basically live in the past, a past featuring the wasteful spector of private automobi le domination. However, oun past transpbrtation sins have begun the tedious and painful pnocess of catch ing up with us. Bus priority systems are inevitable live, mone viable places =¡rply because they w-i ll make centnal cities and usually opposed to those by painful play. Horneven, change is "o.kr'and Some centen city menchants can't motivated pnimani ly by self-interest. look beyond the parking meter in front of their doors to see the lO00 fnee spôces located in suburbia. They cari't see the bus anound the corner. The implementation of a major bus pnionity system is going to nequine a major publ ic education pnogram ¡f ¡t is go¡ng to be accomplished. The stnategiós and pnocedunes of such a Fognam could genenate another Bus veny i ntenest i ng nepont. The authon firmly bel ieves that downtown Washingtou could greatly the establishment of a major'bus priority system. This not detract from, but add to the viability of Metro._ lt ai=o would be complementary to increased rai I commuter service. Bus prionity systems should also aid nathen than hi,nden taxi and truck service. Perhaps a vensi'on of the two models pnesented in this report wi I I be found =l¡t"ble after more extensive technical studies are completed. lfithout such a system ¡t is doubtful whether nery napid rail lines and freeways can f,onge viable solutions to hlashington's transportation def icienci"". The future is indeed now and ¡t looks like a bus I ane and a bus street. benef it from system would �rg:EENDIT Appendîx l3l Surgested Reroutlng Fl.f,ure I of D.C. Translt Route fB Thls reroutlng appÎles to Models Ono and Îvro Basle for Rerouttng: L. ImProved Patronage 2. Inproved aree senrloe -,fVItt-Do lranslt Ben¡lces 3. Better coorËllnatltin: 4. Restn¡eture M St. bue stope fot' bue lane operatlon Tennlnal. s ,6th $t. iltl 38 now o ë+ t N Süncet 31st $ü. becomee :7Lr. onê-way fit. notth r{t a- rÞ(Þ - K -:-'- ey Brldge ( l.{ gt. <+ il '¡Il sconsln Avenue il 91st St. Potomao Rlver o Ro s slyn Terninal PneeentRoutg-o-Propo eed gee Ítgure ) ) �Aþpendlx 132 S'lgure II Rtrsh Hour Bt¡s La¡ree fon M and Ï11 gcorrsln Avenue St. Between Key Brldge theee Ia¡res apply t,o ModeLs One gnd lwo M St. Wt sconstn ,{venue RI6HT TURÑ OÑLV I P A x .l e 16 6 rt u 3 ls e A 5 E f Ê. Potonac St. tM e ,CI N ß ts Pæ P P50 G A L c t, ß a 73ra st. L. A A ñ P20 PtO P il ß U 5 PÐ e l{ A A G d T o (, ) E î2 sI r$ P40 f4th Þ:t. Lese.nd Senr lce G  Pxx mnn Rxxf lvvÀ 1o lfhltehunst freeway Statton saleefServl cê Auto off- Street Parklng (wtt h estlmated erpaeeg) Bue Stop - netalned Bus Stop - ellnlnated E¡s Stop - netr f ron lilhltehunet freeway f,ey Br.t dgs �Appendlx'133 trlgure ) - $ug,geeted Reroutlng _ot _D.C.-_lranelt Bt¡¡crt tZ 5t ,4 t6 tg - westbound on !l Eü. Between 31et St. and lÍlsconsln åvc Roütes 30 l{t seonsln Ave 31et beconeg one-!f ay North N gt. neYt route Ëù 1 ¡ beeoneg on9-way I t l{eet I I Pro gpect S.t. I ß I I t I R I i I old fB rþute .---.¡---\ Poif offícc -A-.}---- ¡i'l gt. ¡¡ - Legend old Routes 3or'e New Routee JOr g - - a - e ,Stop ¿lbandoned Er¡¿'k:ct¡t E¡e StoP Retalned -fTTrTIrmTnmTfTl B¡e Stop New RRR Br¡e Stop Consldered Br¡ B¡t ReJected - ìlot to Sc¡lc - I �Appendlx FtEure 4 T34 Bt¡e Lanee Wteeonstn .Ave to 25¡n õt' fon !l 9t' end - peti"ãlf"antà Avêt anô, 25th gt,. Re¡outlng to K 3t' Undelç'ass Waehlngton Clrole I zf¡ st M 3r, I wvì4 BI'SE5 I lr¡r¡ - ßoçK CßEEK Legend 5 tf Bue StoP rnumm¡ üervl ae G5 Governnent Gg sr, gtatlon gG æ¡h st Giarege Rlght I\¡r'lr GS 3ot st P (5o) of 65 Br¡e Lane Parklng FacllltY (# of 3t P (6) 3tst st <-DcÍ t'r )) Cro esoven {o) P ( x) epaoes) Centen Barnler Ellmlnatlon New llVM Route ArsES Rlght 1\¡rtl ¿r' Pennltted Rr¡eh Hour Bt¡s tanes AVE M9l. atê Atl sc &b Lr,r,cs �Aopendlx Ftgure 5 - Rer"outtng of -Translt &¡e Rou tes ln the lfaahlngton Clrcle rtiea (uoael ftro OnrY) t- Letren{ I Preeent TÙVM DCT --rD-S¡ggeeteô Ë E ó routes úr> Suggegted l'fW{ tPutee Preeent 3 SB88 routee DCT r* pô fã + tn t v routes , No Pank145 t , 0 , - 6:fopn !¡[on. - 5at. ///t//t// ?am .F: ¡1 ñ6 , t 0 r{ a I û 0 fio a t a a. z o ÞrÐ l¡¡ zU I u oü I ì t , , f{ 0 rí ô L t\¡ ñ¡ t t f¡ o rl t ô t (f¡ À r{ I I 2 r ã ] rn { if N J È tt n \ 0t ìl € r¡ o ,, ù ¡a ûi 0, ü 3 + tî N I o .Ë F' I 00 üt ( t¡J E ú, 6 É. r¡¡ tz. t¡, \) î sfi Es ¡Ë rË Y Thls nodel eegnent doee not ultlllze bua pr'Lorlty Lanes I 35 �Appêndtx Læm[& for: Flgure 10 Flgure li - Full Pnlor{ty CBD Bus Prlor'lty OBD Bt¡s tlegments: Model Ono $egmenta: Model Îr*c¡ (anA) Tlmc. Bupwaf lrleekday ll¡gh Hour Ers ,$treet Ílns Lano 7 - gzl}ans 4 - 6:3OPn BusLane?-9;3oan Bus Lane 4 - 6¡jOpm Br¡s Lãne Dtrectlon -.1¡ Rlght I\rrn \ Cro ssover 140 �{ppendlÌ Flgure 1O - Pr4or{ty CBD Brra - 9egments 141 ModeL One Þs f! o¡.1 û a å¡ ci fi *är ! ül: r:1 ìt tr 3¡l . *dl rü at I i,û t,, f"û I åi¡ ,¡ t C .9 + ¡ t t ( F_T_ a te ra a t a U, a a I êû ¡ t¡ a I 1a la aa in ¡l a a a -- I a a a *oû É5 Fs ;r -- -ao a û ¡ .lÞ aa 11Þ tND a ao f?l s¡a il .ir _| Éå3 Ia + vt û 9rú t¡t .t 1l 6 ,ot€ V I Ê s l.l I - b ¿ þø aa aa a I a a - + -t + I <- ao a aaaa a û 2 <0 dr at ¿15 *gt T Èå 6 ã ¡ 3f" r! fil û: 9¡ t3 ,í':; j¿ s Êt cf r a aa a a I û a a a J L t 3 r) rrt EU ló fi frü Y N rþü ù C a J c a {t + a ti ü- ç a nt IE a a a sct tû r! a o c o I a D ü åü a û rh o. :!n tr ¿tG t + Ð aaaaoaaaaa v ùt a Ë: !- atr ; ô lr: , u? l. : t: .ll i E aa s .t- + UI ü ¡- -- - + ¡ i:. aa a a aaa a aa ¿ û lrl .ã¡.3. Eü -.r- gt ni a U a. a .ll Ê ëo i, lt t t aa r-T Ê üÞr :- o + 5 c ô (J �lc t. Sl.rtltt t6+å 5+ ñft Br;þ 8os B¡s 1o Avtn* l¡ar¡ L¡aat Ars l¿rxt crol¡¡r 8i ,iÏ; ,f:, a tì Fl¡ 's+ ßÀJr cl P9+ ¡rligco¿¡i¡ soä ¡l ¡l ct € rd¡ç A,C 4 'l 'i:,:' tl Õ ¡I a ,zrt r¡ o sl - rr'$ rt st 13 rl l3ñ Brs Lr¡¿ l'¡ñ St I'l Ist I ¡ GSt ll.-. ¡E* lr 5t a tt 1: I 13" st a E a lrrà tl ? .l Lsl l{tr t r:.7 xsr ttt ,{ tr = o 1o 5t t c+ lo¡ l¡rc¡ Avcøc Str ,_ st 3 = o 5t o- f, €s+ g Þs? 5-r { € . Сltørc o Awroc &¡stilclioa T" A¡t ¡5r st I ulh 'sr Ér[ 5t I ÍadcTtsleace Avracc <a- 'Avrr0c Arsttt a a SW Bet fmol Dgt tûrtlq s+ st ?t csi 1c Rssfi tlær Ebs Lrne¡ 3rÞ Érå + J (o HSr ¡rllr ç a o .rrr- s+ c c+ 3l Prnnsglranít -ìa 't s+ ^ta r2* -r o {. c¡?iål 5t ltt .rä c I a a a a K5t CD rrl a It st c2 t_ a 7c ,<.y 9".¿5e cÐ if 3t.tl C'rcle 3r o Ls.5 ll" a ilsL t..3 I Sc¡}f st a g &hnl Ar¡ tF- grt 3l @ 8É s+ a ãracrr at 1o I ?+r st w rt s-*t l" FlnnsyLtarr Arrn.rc ¡¡¡.-p¡. RssÀ f{.úr LrlC¡ cr¡t¿f sl Bus o ? o ) x �-.¡?Fv Flgune L2 - r1J MaJon Auto Routee.- Stneet 6egnentg Wlthout lranslü Sen¡lae (ModeL fvro ) ôg t ltt N d t¡ Y I ì$¿ E [] tt u 2 ta ffi E toüt w ru rrrr-ìoü v, I t) Eå ! No Transtt Sen¡lOe d. II H a ü Y l- x ¡¡,1 BT û T.ti ¿ I o b È .t u¡ I C tt rl ti ! n t tI I r-__l ¡l I c *ô N II g It s II U -E o 0- , t) L 1 g ù ti 0'l l{ II ¡t û t , t 0 0 , o c 0 s ¡ + t ß ,J 0." L4t,h Street Northbound Lanes C¡¡I TI K st Outen a Lane s --rú -,f- Legs than 5 B¡ses per R¡eh lbur F' ïi d I ú,5 - -- -(gtneet New �APPENDIX Mode1 - Tho: TABI,E I Suggested Center Clty Routes for Selected Sa¡rple Routes Busuray between 20th St ¿inA f4tfr St eastbound and l,llth St Bus Street southbour.rd betwÉen K St and Pennsylvanla Ave; Pennsylvania Ave Bus Street eastbourd between'14th St and 11th St; (downtov¡n termiñal PennsyJ-vania eve Bus Street between 13ih Si, and 12th St); nor.thbour-rd on l1th St Bus Street between Pennsylvard.a Ave and K St; westbound on K St between 11th St and 14th St. DCT L4, TZ, TT, N5: K St - westbound; WI L2, L7, L9, 85; same as above except K St Busway only between Connectlcut Ave and 14th St eastbound and westbou:rd. D2, D4: K St Busway between 20th St and t4tfr St eastbourd and westbound; K St bétween l4th St and llth St eastbound and westbound; 1lth St Bus Street between K St and F St northbound and southbound; F St Bus Street between ll-th st and 7th st eastbound and westbound; F st-4th st-5th st-D st to D st and 4trr St; D St between 4tfi St and Louislana Ave eastbound and westbound. DCT 60: l1th St Bus Street between K St and Pennsylvanla Ave northbound and southbound; Perursylvania Ave Bus Street between 11th St and 7th St eastbound and westbound; Perursyivania Ave between Tttr St anA 4tf¡ St eastbor.¡nd and westbound; 4th St beiween Perursylvania Ave and Independence Ave northbot¡nd and southbound. DCT 82, 84, E6, G4: 14th St southbot¡nd between Thomas Circle and K St; 14th St Bus Street southbound between K St and H St; H St Bus Street westbound between tlth St and 16th St; (dovnrtovnr termlnal between H St and Ï õt on 16th St); l6tn St northbound to Rhode Island Ave¡ DCT DCT 82, 84, 86, BB: H St B.rs Street between 17th St and 14th St eastbound St between 14th St and 5th St eastbound anrl westbound. and westbound; H DCT BO: sa¡ne as above; in adrlitlon, 4t;h and 5th St betr,veen H St and D St; St and North Capltal St eastbound and westbound. D St between 4th DCT 40 , 42i Uth St between Connecticut Ave,/K St and H St northbound and southbóundi U St B;s Street between 17th St and 14tfr St eastbound and west* bound¡ f4in St Bus Street between H St and F St northbound and southbound; F St Bus Street between 14th St and 7th St eastbound and westbound; ln addltlon Route 4O to D St via 5th/Utln Sts, D St between 4tfr St and lst St eastbound and westbound. DCT 3Zr3B: D St between l-st St and 7th St eastbor:nd and westbound, 7th St between D St and Pennsylvania Ave norbhbound and southbotrnd; Pennsylvanla Ave Bus Streêt between 7th St- and 14tfi St eastbound and westbound; f4tfr St Btæ Street between Pennsylvanla Ave and H St northbound and southbor.md; H St Bus Street between 14th St and 17th St eastbound and westbound. 30, 32r 3tlr 36t Independence Ave between Perursylvanla Ave and 7th St eastbound and westbou:rd; 7th St Bus Street between Independence Ave and Pennsylvania Ave northbound and southbound; Pennsylvanla Ave Bus Str"eet between Tth St and 14th St eastbound and westbor¡nd; f4tn St Bus Street between Pennsylvanla Ave and H St northbor.rnd and southbound; and then 30, 36 to H St Bus Street between 14th St and 17th St eastbourld and westboundi 32t 34 to K St and then K St Busway between 14th St and 20th St. DCT �Appendix lD'll NíÌ, N4: (l<'rnner:1;J r:ul; Âve he'rtween l lJt;h ,'.,i1; ¿vr<l K $1;, rrnrl l Tth Ílt; between K i:11, ancl H l-11, nor'l;lrtxruncl ¿rnrl soubhbor-urd; Il Sb Bus Street between l7th St ancj 14th St easl;bormci anri westbound; 14th flt Bus Street between H St and F St norbhbound and southbound; 14th St Bus Street between F St and pennsvl-vania Ave southbound; (downtov¡r terminal on I'erursylvania Ave between f4ti-3t *d13th St); Pennsylvania Ave Bus Street tretween 14th St and 1lth St eastbowid; 1lth St Bus Street between Pennsylvania Ave and F St northbound; F St fus Street between llth St and 14th St westt,or.rnd. D3, Nl-, N3, Xl, 41, 87, G7: C St rush hour bus street between 23rd Ave eastbound and westbound; 19th St, t8th St, E St, New york Avenue, State PL, South Exeeutive Pl, I{amllton Pl to áno from Éennsvivanla Ave: Perursylvania {ve Bus Street between 14ttr St and 7th St eastboqnd anä westboundi then X}, -97:^BT t 7tln St above Pennsylva.rúa Ave northbound and southbound; A1 follows A2-AU to be dlscussed shortly¡ Nl, N3, Dl, D3, 7th St Bgs Streeú beh¡een PennsylvarLia Ave and Independence Ave-northbourrd and sóuthbound t Tth St between hdependence Ave and D St SVü northbound and southbouncj, DCT Dl , St and Vlrginia 42, 44, 46, AB: Tnctependenee Ave between 3rd St and 4tfr St SW eastbound and westbound; Independence Ave betweerr 4tfr St and 7tf¡ St westbound; 7th St Bus Street between Tndependence Ave and Pennsylvanla Ave northbound;- pennsylvanla Ave E;s street between 7th st and 14th *St weåtbound; (ciowntor^nn termlnal oñ 14th St between E St ano F St); 14th St Bus Street áorthbound between penns.vlvania Ave and F St; F St Bus Street eastbounil between 14th St and /th St; Zth Stsouthbound bretween F St and Perunsylvanla. Ave; Pennsylvanla Ave between Zth St ano 4tfr St eastbound; 4th St between Pennsyivanla Ave and fndependence Ave southbound. DCT DCT 70, 71, 72, 742 7th St between K St and Pennsytvania Ave nonthbound and southbound; 7tt't St Bus Street between Pennsylvania Ave and lndependence Ave; below lndependence Ave selected nuns to HElrl, SW Bus Tenminal, and Ft McNain. F2, F4z (combined with R out es V4, V6) Above K St via 9th St northbound and southbound; KS t between 9th St and llth St eastbound and westbound; I lth S IB us Stneet between K St and Pennsylvania Ave northbound and southbound; Pennsylvania Ave Bus Street betwe,en llth St and 7tn St eastbound and westbound. 7tt't St Bus Stneet between Pennsylvania Ave and lndependence Ave northbound and southbound; to D St SW and then below D St the old V4, V6 routes. DCT K4, K6, J6: Above K St 9th St southbound; K St between 9th St and llth St westbound; llth St Bus Street between K St and Pennsylvania Ave southbound; Pennsylvania Ave Bus Street between I lth St and l4th St westbound; (downtown terminal on Pennsylvania Ave between lzth St and l3th-St); l4th St Bus Street nortirbound between Pennsylvania Ave and K St ; K St eastbound between l4th St and l2th St; above K St lzth St nonthbound. DCT 54: J4 St Bus Street between K St and Pennsylvania Ave nonthbound and southbound; Pennsylvania Ave Bus Street between l4th St and 7t¡t St eastbound and westbound; eastbound and southbound to lndependence Ave via Pennsylvania Ave and 4th St; westbound and nonthbound via lndependence Ave and the 7th St Bus Street. DCT 145 �Appendix 146 DCT 50, 52r 53: l4th St Bus Street between K St on<l Pennsylvania Ave northbound and southbound; l4th St between Pennsylvania Ave and lndepenclence Ave southbouncJ; ln<lependence Ave between l4th St ancl l'zth St eastbound; (Route 50 terminates at the SW Mall Bus Tenminal, Route 52 nuns east-west on lndependence Ave east of l2th St); lzth St Expressway Bus Lane between Independence Ave and Constitution Ave northbound and north on lzth St to Pennsylvania Ave; Pennsylvania Ave Bus Stneet between lzth St and ¡4th St westbound. DCT U2, 1)4, U6, U8, X2: East of Massachusetts Ave on H St eastbound and *".tboúnd;' b.iwe.n 4th St/Massachusetts Ave and K St lgtt', St eastbound and westbound; New York Ave between 9th St and I lth St eastbound and westbound; cutback runs I lth St southbound to H St westbound to New :Yonk Ave eastbound; through nuns New York Ave between llth St and l3th St eastbound and westbound; H St westbound to Connectícut Ave then northbound to K St and eastbound on K St to l4th St and southbound on K St to New Yonk Ave. 52, 54, 55, 56: l6th-St north of H St nonthbound and southbound; H St Br-¡s Stneei between l6th St and l4th St eastbound and westbound; | 4th St Bus Stneet between H St and F St northbound and southbound¡ F St Bus Stneet between l4th St and llth St; llth St Bus Street between F St and Pennsylvania Ave northbound and southbound; (tenminal remains at old Post Off ice Building with loop back to llth St via lzth St and Pennsylvania Ave. AB¿,,W Fannagut Square Buses: These buses would reach the intensection of the Penñsylvania Ave and ¡4th St Bus Streets either via the Memorial Bridge and the bus noutes discussed fon the State Depantment and South White Hous¡e ereas, or via the l-95 Bridges, C St, l2th St and Pennsylvania Ave; l4th St Bus Street between Pennsylvania Ave and H St northbound and southbound; H St Bus Stneet between l4th St and lTth St westbound; (downtown term ina I on H St between Connecticut Ârr" and lTth St)l lltt', St between H St andrK St northbound; K St Busway between lTth St and l4th St eastbound; l4th St Bus Stneet between K St and H St southbound. Note this loop pattern could be reversed fon selected runs, such as-Eñã am rush, and the ABtrlf buses wou I d run westbound on K St and eastbound on H Stneet. WMA farnogut Square Buses: I lth St Bus Stneet between Pennsylvania Ave and F St northbound; F St Bus Street, between llth St and l4th St westbound; l4th St Bus Street between F St and H St northbound; H St Bus Sträet bètw.en l4th St and Connecticut Ave westbound; (downtown terminal oñ C-onnecticut Ave between H St and I St); K St Busway between l|tt't St and l4th St eastbound; l4th St Bus Stneet between K St and Pennsylvania Ave southbound; Pennsylvania Ave Bus Street between l4th Si and llth St eastbound. Note selected WMA buses in the am rush would use llth St to reech f-Ft and then proceed west on K St and east on H St, a neverse loop pattern. 2 t 3, 4: K St Busway between 20th ITJVM Regu lan Serv ice, Routes I , St and l4th St eastbound and westbound; K St between | 4th St and I lth St eastbound and westbotrnd; llth St Bus Street between K St and F St northbound and southbound; F St Bus Stneet between I lth DCT L I I �Appendix l4Z St and lOth St eastbound; l0th St between F St and Pennsylvania Ave sor,rthbound; Pennsylvania Ave Bus Street between lOth St and llth St westbound; llth St Bus Street between Pennsylvania Ave and F St nonthbound,' (downtown terminal on llth St Bus Street between E St and F St). Note. in orden to provide better service fon WVM patrons in the downtown area:selected nuns could use the l4th St Bus Street between K St and F St and the F SL Bus Street between I 4th St and llth st.' Regular Service over Memorial Bridge (Excluding Fanragut Square Buses):- via State Department and South"White House Bus "oJt"" to Pennsylvania Ave and l4th St; l4th St Bus Street between Pennsylvania Ave and F St northbound; F St Bus Street between l4th St and llth St eastbound; llth St Bus Street between f St and Pennsylvania Ave ABtiW southbound; (downtown terminal on I lth St Bus Street beiween E St and Pennsylvania Ave); Pennsylvania Ave Bus Street between I lth St and l4th St westbound. ABt/W Regulan Service oven l-95 Bridges: (Two patterns¡ s€lected nuns assigr,"d to each pattern) Pattern l: C St between l4th St and lzth St eastbound and westbound; lzth St between C St and Independence Ave northbound and southbound; lzth St Expresswðy and lzth St between lndependence Ave and Pennsylvania Ave northbound;- (downtown terminal on Pennsylvania Ave Bus Street east of lzth St); Pennsylvania Ave Bus Street between lzth St and 7tn St eastbound; 7th St Bus Stneet between Pennsylvania Ave and lndependence Ave southbound; lndependence Ave between 7th St and lzth St westbound. Pattenn 2: C St between ¡4th St and lzth St eastbound; l2th St between C St and Pennsylvania Ave (vis lzth St Expnessway) northbound; Pennsylvania Ave Bus Stneet between l?th St and l4th St westbound; (downtown terminal on Pennsylvania Ave Bus Stneet between lzth St and l4th St); l4th St between Pennsylvania Ave ond C St southbound. WMA R egulan Service (Two patterns¡ selected nuns assigned to each patte rn) Patter"n I : D St between I st St and 7tn St ãastbound and westb ound,. 7th St between D St and Pennsylvania Ave southbound; Penn s ylvania Ave Bus Street between 7tn St and llth St westbound; I lrh St Bus Street between Pennsylvania Ave and F St nonthbound! ( cutb ack tenminal on llth St between Pennsylvania Ave and E St th nou sh runs to Farragut Square via routes pneviously described); FSt Bus Stneet between I lth St and 7tn St eastbound; 7tn St between FSt and D St southbound. Pattenn 2z 7tn St Bus Street between I ndep erndence Ave and Pennsylvania Ave northbound and southbound; Penn s ylvania Ave Bus Street between 7tn St and llth St westbound; I lrh St Bus Stneet between Pennsylvonia Ave and F St nonthbound; ( cutb ack tenminal as above). F St Bus Street between llth St añ¿ 7tn s t eastbound; 7tn St between F St and Pennsylvania Ave southbound �� Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Bus priority strategies for Downtown Washington Subject The topic of the resource Bus lines--Washington (D.C.) Description An account of the resource Distributed by National Technical Information Service, Springfield. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Arthur J. Smith Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1972 Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource Documents Language A language of the resource English Type The nature or genre of the resource Text https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/13460/archive/files/f2aa1fe52e3b703d251d2eea4144f286.pdf?Expires=1779321600&Signature=OsZMnTlr9pp%7EJuu1RT-dXZyeG0BP3K0QAf51NNxEb0WgoBSEqYQCTBM4Fzdo9iRvM6M4xvsUvKrB9zU%7EyKyeCyHqokpJm1bkhY5LSRKGR9swFW3aL7Svw1UlgzGz83N99Dom9ezpo8z8-vxWUdvAiyrSHFPhjPyEDXuAags0fzjrEQISnfI09ZwAV24btNBKp1NsHCswu4l%7Ed9b0G5ysKmZ8GoK8AJQsSQ4PF6Yt8hW9T7bak7G-0BStu8a9gtygIvscOTqDFLype0HCHdFMhrkE9XI3zzAa-t139I-Bh0c8MTbEbPV9YqT%7EhEdR9PiGQ7O65ElOvhOvIrbrw8ocRA__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM c74ed139233583f02b3dd705177b0094 PDF Text Text �RAIL RAPID TRANSIT \ FOR THE NATION'S CAPITAL TRANSIT DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM 1965 National Capital Transportation Agency 1634 Eye Street, N. W., Washington, D. C . 20432 �NATIONAL C A P I T A L T R A N S P O R T A T I O N AGENCY WASHINGTON OFFICE OF THE ADMINISTRATOR T R A N S M I T T A L TO: The g o v e r n i n g b o d i e s , a g e n c i e s , c o m p a n i e s , o r g a n i z a t i o n s and persons d e s i g n a t e d i n S e c t i o n 204(d) o f t h e N a t i o n a l C a p i t a l T r a n s p o r t a t i o n A c t o f 1960. I n accordance w i t h S e c t i o n 204(d) o f the N a t i o n a l C a p i t a l T r a n s p o r t a t i o n A c t o f 1960 t h i s d r a f t r e p o r t d e s c r i b i n g NCTA's 1 9 6 5 r e v i s i o n o f t h e T r a n s i t D e v e l o p m e n t P r o g r a m i s t r a n s m i t t e d f o r y o u r r e v i e w a n d comment. T h i s program would i n a u g u r a t e t h e development o f a r e g i o n a l r a i l r a p i d t r a n s i t s y s t e m o f t h e s c o p e recommended b y t h e A g e n c y i n i t s R e p o r t t o t h e P r e s i d e n t o f November 1 , 1962 and w h i c h t h e N a t i o n a l C a p i t a l r e g i o n w i l l u l t i m a t e l y n e e d . The s y s t e m p r o p o s e d h e r e i n w i l l p r o v i d e t h e r e g i o n w i t h g r e a t l y i m p r o v e d mass t r a n s i t s e r v i c e . I t i s an essent i a l and s i g n i f i c a n t beginning toward t h e s o l u t i o n o f t h e r e g i o n ' s l o n g - r a n g e t r a n s p o r t a t i o n p r o b l e m . I t w i l l be o p e r a t i o n a l l y e f f i c i e n t and e c o n o m i c a l l y f e a s i b l e . I t will t a k e about f i v e y e a r s t o p u t i n t o o p e r a t i o n . I n p r e p a r i n g t h i s program and i t s r e l a t e d f i n a n c i n g p l a n , t h e Agency h a s t a k e n i n t o account t h e problems w h i c h a t t e n d e d C o n g r e s s i o n a l c o n s i d e r a t i o n o f t h e program proposed i n 1963, and h a s i n c o r p o r a t e d t h e r e s u l t s o f i t s p l a n n i n g and engineering s t u d i e s conducted during 1964. Darwin Stolzenbach Administrator December 3, 1 9 6 4 �c o n t e n t s Introduction I and Summary page 1 MODERN TRANSPORT FOR THE C A P I T A L C I T Y 3 Balanced Transportation 3 Revival 4 of R a i l Rapid T r a n s i t R a i l Rapid T r a n s i t f o r Washington 6 Downtown Subway Radial Routes Operation 8 E x t e n d e d Coverage by Bus Automobile Connections Benefits II 9 ENGINEERING 11 Recommended R a i l R a p i d T r a n s i t S y s t e m 12 C o n n e c t i c u t Avenue Route Columbia H e i g h t s Route B & 0 Route Benning Pentagon Route Route Stations Displacement Variants f r o m P r i o r Recommendations 16 Rapid T r a n s i t Vehicles 16 Capital 17 Cost Staging of Construction 17 �c o n t e n t s III T R A N S I T REVENUES AND EXPENSES 19 Traffic 19 Passengers Walking Feeder t o and f r o m Stations Bus P a s s e n g e r s Passengers Using Total Yearly Automobiles Passengers Revenues 21 Passenger Other Revenue Revenue Expenses 22 Operating Expenses Depreciation Expense Summary o f R e v e n u e s and E x p e n s e s IV FINANCING THE T R A N S I T DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM Source The 24 27 o f Funds 27 Financing Plan 27 Grants Bonds Timing of Capital Outlays Repayment V ORGANIZATION AND OPERATION 31 VI CONCLUSIONS 32 AND RECOMMENDATIONS �f i g u r e s follows 1 Recommended R a i l Rapid T r a n s i t System 2 Downtown Subway 3 Rapid 4 Rail Rapid Transit 5 Rail Rapid T r a n s i t Saves 6 Rail Rapid Transit page: 2 6 Transit Travel Time Between S t a t i o n s f o r t h e Bus 7 Rider 8 Time 8 f o r the M o t o r i s t 9 t a b l e s on 1 Foreign Rapid T r a n s i t Systems 2 Estimated Capital 3 D i s t a n c e s by T y p e o f C o n s t r u c t i o n 4 P e r c e n t o f P e a k Hour T o t a l 5 Operating 6 D e p r e c i a t i o n on R a p i d 7 1980 18 Transportation 25 8 E s t i m a t e d R e v e n u e s and 9 Schedule Anticipated 24 t o Meet Charges of C a p i t a l 19 23 Transit Vehicles Revenues A v a i l a b l e 18 Trips E x p e n s e f o r 1980 Debt S e r v i c e 10 5 Cost t o Downtown by P u b l i c page: Expenses O u t l a y s by Pay-Out Schedule 26 Source 28 29, 30 �i n t r o d u c t i o n The National National in a n d s u m m a r y C a p i t a l T r a n s p o r t a t i o n A g e n c y was C a p i t a l Transportation Act o f 1960 e s t a b l i s h e d by (74 S t a t . S e c t i o n 2 0 4 ( a ) , t h a t the Agency s h a l l p r e p a r e and 537) may which r e q u i r e s , from time to r e v i s e a T r a n s i t Development Program f o r the t r a n s p o r t a t i o n o f w i t h i n the National Capital region. t h e p r o g r a m i s t o be In carried a November 1 , 1962 mended a n 8 3 - m i l e distributor out Section 204(c) until e x p r e s s l y a u t h o r i z e d by network of r a i l extending t h e C o n g r e s s i n May District bill (H.R. s e n t a t i v e s and 1963, returned resulting the favorably reported transit by t h e House o f a system line. Repre- concluded that c e r t a i n r e v i s i o n s t h e H o u s e D i s t r i c t C o m m i t t e e w o u l d be d e s i r a b l e . of extension l a t e r present to p l u s t h e commuter r a i l r o a d considered the Agency has the Committee. A g e n c y i n i t s 1962 The t h e summer o f 1 9 6 3 , p o r t i o n of the r a i l I t calls l i n e s o f w h i c h 13 m i l e s w o u l d be capable forwarded recommended s y s t e m i s , n e v e r t h e l e s s , e s s e n t i a l l y t h a t a p p r o v e d by is was downtown to the D i s t r i c t Committee f o r f u r t h e r study. o f t h e p r o g r a m a p p r o v e d by transit during w i t h i n D.C, t h i s proposal S i n c e December 1 9 6 3 , The A f t e r hearings the Agency, mainly Pennsylvania A l l of the e n d o r s e d by P r e s i d e n t K e n n e d y and 8929) a u t h o r i z i n g a 23-mile December 9, the of i n s u b w a y , 19 m i l e s i n a l l . Committee o f t h e House o f R e p r e s e n t a t i v e s p r o p o s e d by On 1963. legislation. w e l l beyond t h e D i s t r i c t Bowie, Maryland. p a r t s o f t h e r a d i a l s w o u l d be p r o g r a m was of r a p i d t r a n s i t , c o n s i s t i n g o f a downtown system w i t h s i x r a d i a l s 1962 part " R e p o r t t o t h e P r e s i d e n t " , t h e A g e n c y recom- R a i l r o a d b e t w e e n U n i o n S t a t i o n and The time persons s t a t e s t h a t no C o l u m b i a , p l u s 15 m i l e s o f i m p r o v e d commuter s e r v i c e on p o r t i o n and the f o r 25 m i l e s o f r a i l i n subway. to a system of the similar to rapid T h i s r e v i s e d system s c o p e recommended by the report. r e p o r t d e s c r i b e s the r e v i s e d T r a n s i t Development Program w h i c h the Agency has prepared f o r c o n s i d e r a t i o n by the 89th Congress, and proposes a p l a n f o r i t s f i n a n c i n g . T h e r e i s a c l e a r and p r e s s i n g n e e d f o r a r a i l r a p i d t r a n s i t s y s t e m t h a t w i l l a l l e v i a t e c o n g e s t i o n on d o w n t o w n s t r e e t s and o n t h e c r o w d e d a r t e r i e s l e a d i n g i n t o the c i t y . T h e p r o p o s e d s y s t e m w i l l do t h i s a n d 1 �more. B y m e a n s o f c o n v e n i e n t t r a n s f e r a r r a n g e m e n t s f o r b u s r i d e r s and automobile d r i v e r s a t j u n c t i o n s w i t h major a r t e r i a l s , the b e n e f i t s of f r e q u e n t , d e p e n d a b l e , r a i l r a p i d t r a n s i t s e r v i c e w i l l be e x t e n d e d i n t o the r e g i o n , w e l l beyond the c i t y boundaries. Preliminary engineering and s t u d i e s by NCTA's O f f i c e o f i t s c o n s u l t a n t s have been c a r r i e d b a s e d on r e a l i s t i c f a r enough t o a s s u r e sound engaged i n c o n s t r u c t i n g and V e h i c l e s and equipment w i l l and industrial equipping It F e d e r a l G o v e r n m e n t and public be call cover million. operating m i l l i o n of g r a n t s , shared $50 m i l l i o n by the D i s t r i c t a g a i n s t the Negotiations $100 the D i s t r i c t during e x p e n s e s and before 1967, rail m i l l i o n by o f C o l u m b i a , and i n accordance w i t h T i t l e million 25-mile even under t h e most o p t i m i s t i c system should time of 1960 proon a operative schedule, a c t i o n on proceed promptly under the R e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r i t s f u r t h e r development the auspices and interstate otherwise. T r a n s i t Development Program f o r 1965, rail rapid transit page, c o n s i s t s of t h i s P l a n s and will of development of t r a n s p o r t a t i o n f a c i l i t i e s o p e r a t i o n w o u l d be a s s u m e d by a s u c c e s s o r a g e n c y e s t a b l i s h e d by The the I I I of the organization capable S i n c e t h e c o m p a c t o r g a n i z a t i o n c a n n o t be rapid transit compact o r the of Columbia to the e x t e n t of o n e - t h i r d a r e u n d e r way, of the p r e s e n t Agency. capital guarantee. f o r the continued regional basis. repay the c o n s t r u c t i o n p e r i o d ) , w i t h f o r c r e a t i o n o f an i n t e r s t a t e - c o m p a c t viding basic will of c o s t of c o n s t r u c t i n g The A g e n c y p r o p o s e s t h a t t h e r e q u i r e d i n t e r e s t charges r e i m b u r s e m e n t by Act, i s $431 of facilities. s a l e o f $333 m i l l i o n o f r e v e n u e bonds ( o f w h i c h $52 u s e d t o pay any similar Total estimated system t h a t revenues t h r o u g h $150 operating t h e m o s t modern a v a i l a b l e , m a k i n g u s e the proposed r a i l i s estimated raised be developments. 657o o f t h e c a p i t a l c o s t s . be proposals, cost e s t i m a t e s , t a k i n g advantage of the experience other c i t i e s the l a t e s t Engineering Cost system r e p o r t and depicted an covering i n F i g u r e 1 on engineering Estimates". 2 the proposed the supplement opposite "Engineering ��J MODERN TRANSPORT FOR The t h a t can most u r g e n t only s o l v e i t -- THE CAPITAL C I T Y t r a n s p o r t problem f a c i n g Washington today — increase in severity u n t i l i s the commuters t o and traffic congestion i s no doubt t h a t f u t u r e t r a f f i c To avoid m u s t be on r i g h t s o f way. Mass T r a n s p o r t a t i o n S u r v e y S t a t e m e n t o f F i n d i n g s and highway planning There i s a l i m i t a s u b s t a n t i a l number o f of handling T h i s was 1959 and c o m b i n a t i o n o f new e s t a b l i s h i n g the (74 S t a t . 5 3 7 ) . t h e downtown a r e a Balanced In shaping National I t i s the b a s i s f o r designed f o r the c e n t r a l a r e a a l l p e a k - h o u r t r i p s and c o n s t r u c t i o n of the r a i l h i g h w a y s and the proposed r a i l made t o p r e s e r v e the of the Congress i n i t s grade-separated transit and highway rapid transit rail the pro- system. s o l v e d o n l y by rapid a transit. s y s t e m i s begun p r o m p t l y , c o n g e s t i o n t h r e a t e n s t o become i n t o l e r a b l e . undermine a l l of t h a t would compatible with T h u s , p e a k - h o u r p r o b l e m s i n c e n t r a l W a s h i n g t o n c a n be will operating a major conclusion of I n f a c t a l l p l a n s , i n c l u d i n g t h e D.C. g r a m , a r e p r e d i c a t e d on congestion there today. c i t y of Washington. Unless to people mass t r a n s p o r t f a c i l i t i e s P o l i c y i n the A c t h i g h w a y s y s t e m c o u l d be both capable t h e d a i l y movement o f exceed t h a t c a p a c i t y . Report of C a p i t a l T r a n s p o r t a t i o n Agency be will i n t o t h e c i t y by new grade-separated No c r e a t e d by to a i m e d a t t h e downtown a r e a , and i n t o l e r a b l e congestion, carried adequate steps are taken from t h e i r p l a c e s o f employment. t h e h i g h w a y c a p a c i t y t h a t c a n be one t h e p u b l i c and Such an in increase in p r i v a t e e f f o r t s now enhance the u n i q u e q u a l i t i e s of our N a t i o n a l being Capital. Transportation the p a s t , p u b l i c t r a n s p o r t a t i o n has metropolitan g r o w t h on suburbs, the r a i l and h i g h w a y s - e v e n t h e new l i n e s and a u t o m o b i l e s and i m p r o v e d h i g h w a y s and the t h e community a s k e l e t o n of t r o l l e y r a i l r o a d s a t a t i m e when t h e r e w e r e few More r e c e n t l y , w i t h served paved away, w h i l e - h a v e become c l o g g e d w i t h 3 commuter roads. near u n i v e r s a l car ownership i n t r a n s p o r t s e r v i c e s have w i t h e r e d freeways few well, streets traffic. �E x p l o s i v e growth d u r i n g r e c e n t decades has t h a t no be longer achieved. system c a n be met highway c a p a c i t y . demand, r a i l travelled and I n order rapid transit corridors, befitting enhance t h e i r ranging the i n c r e a s e d i n t h e more h e a v i l y the burden of peak l o a d s i t s p o s i t i o n as a g r e a t c a p i t a l . to the cities into Some 26 i n not having r a i l F o u r U. ( B o s t o n , New York, made c o n s i d e r a b l e p r o g r e s s i n extending and being which w i l l 1962. extended. c o s t the Montreal t h e s o u t h e r n New now systems rapid rapid transit i n recent years. alone (London, Tokyo) system S. c i t i e s t h e 26 with their it enable t h e s e t t i n g up Toronto; both Area, the v o t e r s i n t o open i n 1 9 6 6 . million. new Voters In line i n the Georgia of a r a p i d t r a n s i t a u t h o r i t y ; i s hoped t h a t a c t u a l c o n s t r u c t i o n o f a s y s t e m w i l l 4 have networks. f i v e - c o u n t y A t l a n t a a r e a on November 3 a p p r o v e d an amendment t o t h e C o n s t i t u t i o n which w i l l cities long- P h i l a d e l p h i a a brand c o s t a b o u t $60 cities, among m a j o r a p p r o v e d by i s expected 1. each year i n North American modernizing o f Camden and will Of f o r t h e S a n F r a n c i s c o Bay i s b u i l d i n g a subway w h i c h under c o n s t r u c t i o n which and P h i l a d e l p h i a , Chicago) t a x p a y e r s $792 m i l l i o n , was J e r s e y suburbs Table transit. h a v e b e e n opened i n C l e v e l a n d and A g r e a t new and populations See subways. Washington i s p r a c t i c a l l y subway s y s t e m s new with h a s b e e n c o n s t r u c t e d s i n c e 1945 Programs f o r development of r a i l S i n c e 1945, to improve foreign cities the r a n k s of those p l a n n i n g the w e s t e r n w o r l d have been v e r y a c t i v e Other c o u n t r i e s , i n c l u d i n g i n o p e r a t i o n or under c o n s t r u c t i o n . 14 a r e n a t i o n a l c a p i t a l s . established network. ( O s l o ) t o more t h a n t e n m i l l i o n Over h a l f o f the t o t a l m i l e a g e c a p i t a l s of center commensurate w i t h i t s s i z e t h e s t e p s recommended h e r e national capitals. rapid transit b r i n g s new traffic b e t w e e n c a p a c i t y and introduced a t r a n s p o r t a t i o n system from one-half m i l l i o n have r a i l standards". Transit R u s s i a , have taken p r e c i s e l y is by must Interstate- downtown p a r k i n g and to m a i n t a i n the b a l a n c e s e r v i c e m u s t be the to " i n t e r s t a t e to the p o i n t of c r i s i s thus r e l i e v i n g Washington deserves are by p e r m i t t i n g more a t t e n t i o n t o be p a i d t o t h e d i s t r i b u t i o n R e v i v a l of Rapid and freeways, b u i l t t e r m i n a l problem ( i . e . j , has been i n t e n s i f i e d l e v e l s of s e r v i c e been accomplished other high-design However, the c e n t e r - c i t y congestion) by g r a d u a l i m p r o v e m e n t ; new For highways, t h i s has P r o g r a m and p u t demands on t r a n s p o r t a t i o n be u n d e r way soon. �Table 1. FOREIGN RAPID TRANSIT SYSTEMS P o s t - W o r l d War I I C o n s t r u c t i o n and 1963 M i l e a g e C i t i e s ranked i n order of t o t a l mileage incl."under construction" Metropolitan Population (000) Completed S i n c e 1945 Route M i l e s Under Total Construction 1963 258.0 10.5 10,900 36.0 7,750 2.7 117.4 9.0 Moscow, R u s s i a 8,200 45.0 61,0 16.8 West B e r l i n , 4,000 8.2 40.0 12.9 2,280 6.0 42.9 10.0 14,700 30.5 39.0 13.2 • S t o c k h o l m , Sweden 1,140 25.0 25.0 14.1 •Leningrad, Russia 3,875 11.5 11.5 17.8 2,430 0.6 18.0 4.2 2,575 7.5 7,175 0 17.4 2.0 2,070 5.2 16.5 0 2,005 0 16.5 0 1,070 0 15.5 0 520 0 0 1,860 6.9 6.9 1,890 8.0 13.5 0 8,350 5.4 10.4 2.4 •Rome, I t a l y 2,325 6.6 6.6 6.1 • M o n t r e a l , Canada 2,150 0 0 9.5 •Lisbon, Portugal 1,350 9.0 9.0 0 •Kiev, Russia 1,300 3.3 3.3 5.0 B u d a p e s t , Hungary 2,150 0 2.3 5.0 Glasgow, S c o t l a n d 1,885 0 6.6 0 2,025 4.0 4.0 0 1,000 0 0 3.5 1,405 0 0 3.0 London, Paris, England France Germany Hamburg, Germany Tokyo, Japan Madrid, Spain •Milan, Italy Buenos A i r e s , Barcelona, Vienna, Argentina Spain Austria East Berlin, Germany • O s l o , Norway •Toronto, Canada Athens, Osaka, •Nagoya, Greece Japan Japan •Rotterdam, Netherlands • F r a n k f u r t - a m - M a i n , Germany • E n t i r e S y s t e m s i n c e 1945. a./ C i t y population 7.5 only. 13.2 15.0 8.0 �R a i l Rapid T r a n s i t for The W a s h i n g t o n Washington rapid transit s y s t e m must r e f l e c t the convenience c o m f o r t t h a t people have come t o e x p e c t i n t h e i r p r i v a t e S e r v i c e m u s t be frequent, with convenient, a t t r a c t i v e and f a s t and t h e f i n e s t modern e q u i p m e n t , speed it, and will vehicles comfort. be like t h a t people the automobiles. image o f r a i l transit, as people w i l l come t o know that associated with a i r t r a v e l , with clean, s y s t e m must be g e a r e d can use t h e i r autos to d r i v e network functional spaces. to the highway The r e l a t i o n s h i p o f t h e p r o p o s e d e x i s t i n g highway stations o p e r a t i n g on r i g h t s - o f - w a y d e s i g n e d f o r and h a n d s o m e l y a p p o i n t e d p u b l i c The r a i l tions. The and t o and rail i s illustrated and s t r e e t network from r a p i d rapid transit transit i n Figure so sta- system to 1. A s u b s t a n t i a l p o r t i o n o f t h e s y s t e m must be i n s u b w a y , f o r w i t h i n the monumental., h i s t o r i c o p e r a t i o n on o v e r h e a d soil and conditions w i l l commercial entire Stadium is central central i s out of the q u e s t i o n . p e r m i t bored t u n n e l s so d i s r u p t i o n a r e a s c a n be k e p t t o a minimum. the o n l y p l a c e to r e s i d e n t i a l For example, i n the where the s t r e e t surface w i l l have be c o n s t r u c t e d by c u t - a n d - c o v e r converge, This methods. A key f e a t u r e of the system i s the p o r t i o n c o n n e c t i n g Union S t a t i o n and the C a p i t o l w i t h connect- illustrated T h r e e downtown s t a t i o n s expand Any from t h i s n u c l e u s . a r e common t o a l l r o u t e s -- S t r e e t on G S t r e e t i n t h e h e a r t o f t h e r e t a i l 6 lines principal employment c e n t e r s n o r t h o f t h e M a l l . system t h a t i s developed w i l l the broken i s the core o f the system i n t o which a l l r a d i a l F e d e r a l and c o m m e r c i a l future and t o be t h e m a i n c o n c e n t r a t i o n o f employment and p u b l i c b u i l d i n g s , i n F i g u r e 2. 8th Fortunately, a r e a s o u t h o f K S t r e e t b e t w e e n t h e Potomac R i v e r Downtown Subway. will the c e n t r a l b u s i n e s s d i s t r i c t , structures at s t a t i o n s , which w i l l ing a r e a and 12th S t r e e t shopping area, and and �DOWNTOWN SUBWAY Fig. 2 �Judiciary S q u a r e , b e t w e e n 4 t h a n d 5 t h , and E and F S t r e e t s . To t h e w e s t and n o r t h o f t h e W h i t e H o u s e , two b r a n c h e s t r a v e r s e a r e a s o f activity: 1) t h e s o - c a l l e d N o r t h w e s t s o u t h o f H, Rectangle, located west of 17th, t o be s e r v e d by s t a t i o n s a t 1 8 t h and 2) the l i v e l y growing 2 3 r d on H S t r e e t , and a r e a o f h o t e l s and o f f i c e b u i l d i n g s c e n t e r e d on C o n n e c t i c u t A v e n u e , t o be s e r v e d by s t a t i o n s a t K S t r e e t and a t F l o r i d a A v e n u e . H Street l i n e continues westward through R o s s l y n , which i s r a p i d l y a m a j o r employment s u b c e n t e r , and is the l a r g e s t s i n g l e c o n c e n t r a t i o n of F e d e r a l employment, and, T h i s downtown d i s t r i b u t o r , w i t h the day, w i l l Washington. u n i f y and Station. a change of t r a i n s the opposite d i r e c t i o n . appointments business of will link a l l to facilitate to w a i t stations Union (See Cross-platform trips involving f o r the next t r a i n going t h r e e m i n u t e s a t t h e most f o r a t r a i n g o i n g i n The a c c u m u l a t e d by subway w i l l , by i t s e l f , tremendously. Washington stations w i l l apart central be 10 m i n u t e s . t i m e b e t w e e n t h e s e downtown s t a t i o n s . ) t h e same d i r e c t i o n and of o r f r o m Dupont C i r c l e - w i t h o n l y \\ m i n u t e s for planning scheduled three minutes to the C a p i t o l w i l l t r a n s f e r s a t three of the c e n t r a l which area. strengthen the a c t i v i t i e s to the C a p i t o l Time from Pentagon Figure 3 for travel in trains employment A r u n n i n g t i m e o f no more t h a n 7 m i n u t e s w i l l from the S t a t e Department becoming thence southward to the Pentagon, purposes, i s c o n s i d e r e d a p a r t of the c e n t r a l throughout The I n addition, appreciate time saved i n meeting b u s i n e s s b e n e f i t both government and t h e many t h o u s a n d s o f d a i l y v i s i t o r s t h e c o n v e n i e n c e and c o m f o r t ( e s p e c i a l l y t h i s means o f t r a n s p o r t t h a t w i l l private put i n summer) them w i t h i n e a s y r e a c h o f t h e p l a c e s t h e y came t o s e e . D e s i g n o f t h e subway i n c e n t r a l W a s h i n g t o n the full existing development of t h e c i t y and takes i n t o account i t s potential r e g a r d f o r p r o t e c t i o n o f monumental and h i s t o r i c residential a r e a s i n D. both expansion; with places, parks, and neighborhoods. R a d i a l Routes. C. outer s t a t i o n s Each of the f i v e branch l i n e s Ample p a r k i n g a n d bus transfer serve heavily facilities built-up are provided at f o r the c o n v e n i e n c e of p a s s e n g e r s coming from a l l p a r t s 7 to of ��the region. The c o o r d i n a t e d r a i l - b u s d e s c r i b e d i n some d e t a i l i n a later descriptions of routes w i l l and r a i l - a u t o operations are section of t h i s chapter. Physical be f o u n d i n t h e c h a p t e r on E n g i n e e r i n g . Operationj The recommended r a i l rapid transit hour p a s s e n g e r s w i t h e a s e and w i l l system w i l l c a r r y 50,000 provide a high l e v e l peak- of all-day service. T o t a l p a s s e n g e r s i n 1980 a r e e s t i m a t e d a t 135 m i l l i o n . A l l - d a y schedules i n the c e n t r a l p o r t i o n of the system w i l l same a s a t p e a k p e r i o d s ( a s d e s c r i b e d a b o v e u n d e r but, f o r o p e r a t i n g economy, t r a i n s w i l l "Downtown S u b w a y " ) be s h o r t e n e d a s r e q u i r e d a n d t u r n e d b a c k a t i n t e r m e d i a t e p o i n t s on a l l b u t two o f t h e r o u t e s . s t a t i o n running times f o r the e n t i r e on trips trip requiring combination w i t h existing Extended Coverage job of freeing locations, utilizing by Bus. rail rapid rapid system. trains of t o t a l routes i n section. t r a n s i t c a n n o t do a n e f f e c t i v e of congestion unless i t serves I n t h e c a s e o f bus p a s s e n g e r s , t h e o p p o r - the e x i s t i n g rapid r a i l time between A comparison f o r c o o r d i n a t i o n i s s u g g e s t e d i n F i g u r e 4, w h i c h proposed tageous Rail t h e s t r e e t s and highways diagrammatically, The s t a t i o n - t o - bus r o u t e s , i s p r e s e n t e d i n t h e n e x t m o t o r i s t s and bus p a s s e n g e r s . tunity system, i n c l u d i n g t r a n s f e r , a r e shown i n F i g u r e 3. t i m e s f o r some s e l e c t e d be t h e indicates, bus r o u t e s t h a t c o u l d c o n n e c t w i t h t h e T h i s c o o r d i n a t e d feeder arrangement t o the bus o p e r a t o r s , a s w e l l , i s advan- because: • I t w i l l p e r m i t t h e c o m p a n i e s , i n many i n s t a n c e s , t o e l i m i n a t e t h e s l o w e r , a n d t h e r e f o r e t h e most c o s t l y p o r t i o n , o f t r i p s w i t h i n the congested c e n t r a l area. • I t w i l l c a u s e more e f f i c i e n t u t i l i z a t i o n o f v e h i c l e s on r o u t e s t h a t p a s s t r a n s i t s t a t i o n s , m a k i n g room f o r p a s s e n g e r s b o a r d i n g beyond t h e s t a t i o n . • T u r n i n g back buses a t r a p i d t r a n s i t t r a n s f e r p o i n t s w i l l permit g r e a t e r u t i l i z a t i o n o f buses i n l o c a l s e r v i c e . </ The g r e a t e r speed and c o m f o r t o f t h e combined b u s - r a i l w i l l a t t r a c t more r i d e r s t o t h e b u s e s . For the t r a n s i t rider, t h e advantages c o n s i s t mainly i n time savings combined w i t h broad c o v e r a g e o f t h e c l o s e - i n s u b u r b s . be intensified through system the e f f i c i e n t use of l o c a l 8 This coverage will f e e d e r b u s e s , e a c h one �RAIL RAPID TRANSIT FOR THE BUS RIDER Fig. 4 �RAIL RAPID TRANSIT SAVES TIME Minutes Saved by Use of R a i l : All-Bus Fig. 5 vs Bus-Rail or All-Rail �making s e v e r a l t r i p s all t h e way bus-rail i n the downtown. The combinations are t i m e i t w o u l d t a k e t o make one differences i n travel indicated i n Figure long trip time between a l l - b u s 5 f o r a number o f and selected locations. Automobile Connections. at a l l terminals r o u t e -parking nearly O f f - s t r e e t parking e x c e p t C o l u m b i a H e i g h t s and 12,000 s p a c e s i n a l l a t garages. As indicated i n Figure to the whole network of a r t e r i a l central destination of rapid and rail area, transit. Inner intended but with a v a i l a b l e on spaces w i l l arterials, as d i v e r s i o n of indicated not extensions e x i s t i n g and B&O give be access the ride" set aside r e m a i n i n use in use for "kiss during the special day. parking accessibility. connections are to demonstrate the the w e l l outside common a t many s t a t i o n s w i t h o u t good a r t e r i a l arterial these locations m a k i n g i t c o n v e n i e n t f o r " p a r k and be provided s t a t i o n s , i n open l o t s o r 6, r i d e " c o m m u t e r s , whose a u t o m o b i l e s c a n facilities are a t a l l s t a t i o n s on highways a t p o i n t s In addition, This practice also w i l l are ten facilities shown i n F i g u r e of rail rapid planned highways. i n Figure 1, w i l l 1 2 , 0 0 0 o r more c a r s a t the The function outer 6, which i s transit service e n t i r e network a l l the that of better for is a the sound stations. Benefits. The proposal rail rapid in itself importance w i l l Further, the the extending routes focus of the particular -- system described b o t h p h y s i c a l l y and the service that system i s c a p a b l e of adjusting benefits w i l l be transit operating be felt within Federal of the the the i t s chief community a t District Congress. 9 system as i t s t a n d s or present proposal. large. by by Substantial of Columbia, which i s the i n t e r e s t i n the National r e s p o n s i b i l i t y of the but f l e x i b l e a d a p t a t i o n to f u t u r e needs limits the e c o n o m i c a l l y -- i t p r o v i d e s to schedules w i t h i n beyond the i n this report C a p i t a l r e g i o n and the main ��Direct benefits t o t r a n s i t r i d e r s h a v e b e e n n o t e d a b o v e , and i n d i r e c t benefits t o s t r e e t and h i g h w a y u s e r s benefits t o t h e economy o f t h e D i s t r i c t of i t scitizens w i l l derive transit stations. service i s instituted. establishment, d e n s i t i e s o f development f o l l o w a s a m a t t e r o f c o u r s e a f t e r t h e new w h i c h o c c u p i e s s o much o f t h e D i s t r i c t o f C o l u m b i a , and t o with t h e Government. and p a r c e l o f t h e F e d e r a l I n effect, p l a n t , as v i t a l the system w i l l to i t as the s t r e e t s utilities. P e r h a p s more i m p o r t a n t a r e t h e l o n g - r a n g e b e n e f i t s interaction of transportation when d i r e c t e d b y a n e n l i g h t e n e d improvements public policy. n e t w o r k i s t h e f r a m e on w h i c h t h e r e g i o n a l programming o f b o t h r a i l molding the f u t u r e r e g i o n program w i l l directive near A l l o f these b e n e f i t s a r e important to the F e d e r a l and h i g h w a y s a n d t h e p u b l i c the Other obvious o f C o l u m b i a and t o t h e c o n v e n i e n c e from increased These w i l l those doing business become p a r t have been t o u c h e d upon. and h i g h w a y and m e t r o p o l i t a n Since interest. of the National r a n d u m f o r t h e Heads o f E x e c u t i v e Commissioners of the D i s t r i c t Departments will go f a r t o w a r d The p r o p o s e d Capital region transit policy ( s e e Memo- and E s t a b l i s h m e n t s o f C o l u m b i a , November 2 7 , 1 9 6 2 ) . 10 growth, the transportation be a n i m p o r t a n t i m p l e m e n t a t i o n o f t h e P r e s i d e n t ' s f o r the development from growth i s formed, c a r e f u l improvements i n the p u b l i c that derive and t h e �ENGINEERING Engineering alternative by traffic s t u d i e s by t r a n s i t route system planning existing railroad a comparative a n a l y s i s of r a p i d development s t u d i e s r e l a t i n g matic t r a i n c o n t r o l , and The logical In no information to t r a n s i t v e h i c l e s , n o i s e c o n s t r u c t i o n m e t h o d s and concerning subsurface b o r i n g s and analyses The above e n g i n e e r i n g Appendix Volumes I " E n g i n e e r i n g " published i n support of two-thirds tunneling of will will be subject Further careful and be conditions to b r i e f engineering e v a l u a t i o n of illustrated by the Figure basic 1. the and Cost i n the region. along i n the and be District Facilities," Report. f e a s i b l e t o make existing streets will not c u t - a n d - c o v e r method to t u n n e l i n g , use of street temporary decking i s Agency has been c o n c e n t r a t e d Names o f r o u t e s The traffic installed Engineering Estimates". 11 surface. on report i n t h i s drawing detailed results of Supplement be surface s y s t e m recommended i n t h e p r e s e n t text.). in c o n s t r u c t i o n proceeds below the the (Note: that in detail Thus i n t e r f e r e n c e w i t h preferable i n g s t u d y a r e embodied i n a s e p a r a t e Plans a v a i l a b l e geo- of R a i l r o a d i t will interruption until s t u d y by r e v i s e d to agree w i t h "Engineering I I "Use Where t h e to c o n t i n u e w h i l e auto- These s t u d i e s i n d i c a t e s u r f a c e of b e e n f o u n d t o be to p e r m i t t r a f f i c the w e r e made a t p o i n t s t h e downtown a r e a k e p t t o a minimum. c o n s t r u c t i o n has reduction, studies are reported and and costs. t h e A g e n c y ' s November 1 , 1962 methods w h e r e b y t h e be transportation; subway c o n s t r u c t i o n broken except at s t a t i o n l o c a t i o n s . traffic f o r mass and t r a n s i t v e h i c l e systems; research s p e c i a l problems e x i s t r e s p e c t i n g of Columbia. of facilities of defined studies; feasibility t h e p r o p o s e d downtown subway r o u t e s . In corridors Agency conducted a thorough e x a m i n a t i o n of addition, soil near preliminary engineering alignments w i t h i n t r a f f i c f o r e c a s t i n g and cost of u t i l i z i n g NCTA i n c l u d e : this will engineer- entitled �Recommended R a i l The half Rapid T r a n s i t System p r o p o s e d s y s t e m i s 24.9 (13.1 miles) miles i s u n d e r g r o u n d and ing railway rights-of-way. Except and l o n g , w i t h 29 a n o t h e r 7.5 the s o - c a l l e d Pentagon C i t y a r e a stations. miles About utilizes exist- to the Pentagon for short extensions i n A r l i n g t o n County and to Woodside i n Montgomery C o u n t y , t h e s y s t e m i s c o n t a i n e d w i t h i n the D i s t r i c t C o l u m b i a and populated does not outer providing enabling s t a t i o n s have convenient several stations w i l l motorists trains rapid transit from the (Figs.3&6). sections. a r e l i m i t e d to spreading have l a r g e p a r k i n g system has routes, facilities been p l a n n e d money by to s e r v e the riding greatest p o s s i b l e number o f p e o p l e , t o g e n e r a t e a s much r e v e n u e a s p o s s i b l e d o l l a r of c a p i t a l The radial ing is o u t l a y , and to minimize c o s t of per construction. T r a n s i t Development Program c a l l s f o r the c o n s t r u c t i o n of rapid transit each l i n e inward routes, which are described toward the c e n t e r a t 12th the suburban development s u b u r b s t o s a v e b o t h t i m e and The This means f o r t r a n s f e r t o bus e x t e n s i v e coverage of the ( F i g u r e 4 ) ; and the t h e most d e n s e l y mean t h a t t h e e f f e c t s o f r a i l District; thus serves d i r e c t l y of five s e p a r a t e l y below, f o l l o w - and G Streets. Operation c o n t i n u o u s t h r o u g h t h e downtown t r u n k l i n e ( 1 6 t h S t r e e t t o F i r s t S t r e e t , N.W.), w i t h t h r e e Judiciary Square. Connecticut b e n e a t h Van Federal s t a t i o n s common t o a l l r o u t e s , See provide j u s t west of Connecticut o c c u p i e d by t h e U. Bureau of Standards. and r i d e " f a c i l i t i e s , and garage. The route will the The service utilizing off-street, weather- include f o l l o w s the alignment a of A v e n u e downtown, w i t h s t a t i o n s l o c a t e d n e a r Ordway S t r e e t , K Street. Columbia Road f o r a g r a d e - s e p a r a t e d Except P r o v i s i o n i s made, s o u t h junction with s A v e n u e and be curves there i s a grade-separated i n subway. eastward At H S t r e e t , the Rock Creek line leaves beneath L a f a y e t t e Square where junction with 12 of the Columbia H e i g h t s f o r a e r i a l c r o s s i n g s o f K l i n g l e V a l l e y and the e n t i r e l i n e w i l l Connecticut S. Avenue i n bus Woodley Road, F l o r i d a Avenue, and Park and tunnel s t a t i o n for feeder 590-space m u l t i - l e v e l parking Route. begins at a rock transfer and"kiss bus Connecticut This route N e s s S t r e e t , N.W., station w i l l 8th 2. Avenue Route. Reservation protected Figure i . e . , 12th, the Pentagon Route. Both routes �then c o n t i n u e i n t o the s t a t i o n a t 12th and North-South route a l i g n m e n t o f G S t r e e t , N.W., G Streets. under 12th Columbia Heights Route. on New be Hampshire Avenue n e a r served New by bus S t r e e t can connections with be This route two 13th and s t a t i o n s on Streets with described B&O originates at a s t a t i o n Route. This route will road right-of-way terminal the route The line follows the S t r e e t and the will alignment A s t a t i o n on transfer f a c i l i t i e s . merges w i t h of P a r k Road There are a t Belmont Road. At C o n n e c t i c u t Avenue Route o r i g i n a t e s a t W o o d s i d e i n Montgomery C o u n t y , occupy a p o r t i o n to of the be located Street r a i l r o a d bridge, be e s t a b l i s h e d on presently devoted p r i m a r i l y to i n d u s t r i a l be Avenue, T a y l o r located the District & Ohio Columbia. distance northwest and and equipment s t o r a g e the the west s i d e of B&O t r a c k s ' i n an commercial uses. Rhode I s l a n d A v e n u e . The B&O's r a i l r o a d o p e r a t i o n s faciliarea Other Hampshire t r a c k s u s e d by will Rail- of a t G e o r g i a A v e n u e , Takoma P a r k , New S t r e e t , and s y s t e m and i n the a t Woodside a s h o r t ties w i l l stations w i l l e x i s t i n g Baltimore the Washington T e r m i n a l station will e x i s t i n g 16th transit located above. M a r y l a n d , and of bus Columbia Road; a t 16th C o n n e c t i c u t Avenue the subsequent i t s i n t e r s e c t i o n w i t h G e o r g i a A v e n u e and transfer f a c i l i t i e s . 14th a arranged at t h i s s t a t i o n . Hampshire Avenue, P a r k Road,and C o l u m b i a Road. serves A Pedestrian to a major t r a n s f e r be the entirely separated. All and s t a t i o n s on parking the facilities line will (a total include of 6550 s p a c e s ) . U n i o n S t a t i o n i n subway b e n e a t h t h e Station, connections w i l l ticket hall be curves merges w i t h The existing structure. established with the the line westward i n t o the continues Within 13 enter Union e x i s t i n g concourse transit D S t r e e t , N.W., The line and facilities. i n subway b e n e a t h U n i o n alignment of Benning Route a t 1 s t S t r e e t . kiss-and-ride, line w i l l t o p e r m i t e a s y movement b e t w e e n r a i l r o a d and From Union S t a t i o n , the P l a z a and bus-transfer, Station where i t then curves northwest �through J u d i c i a r y Square, w i t h a s t a t i o n a t E S t r e e t between Streets, 4 t h and t h e n c u r v e s w e s t i n t o G S t r e e t , w i t h s t a t i o n s a t 8 t h and a t 1 2 t h . These three s t a t i o n s a r e common t o a l l routes. B e n n i n g R o u t e . T h i s r o u t e b e g i n s a s a s u r f a c e o p e r a t i o n on r i g h t -of-way where 5th i n the v i c i n i t y o f K e n i l w o r t h A v e n u e and B e n n i n g R o a d , a s t a t i o n w i t h o f f - s t r e e t , w e a t h e r - p r o t e c t e d bus kiss-and-ride provided. facilities Equipment exclusive and p a r k i n g transfer and s p a c e f o r 250 a u t o m o b i l e s w i l l s t o r a g e and m a i n t e n a n c e facilities will N.E., be be located n o r t h o f B e n n i n g Road and w e s t o f K e n i l w o r t h A v e n u e . From the K e n i l w o r t h - B e n n i n g S t a t i o n , the l i n e proceeds southwest a t grade a l o n g the west s i d e of K e n i l w o r t h Avenue, then c u r v e s westward cross t h e A n a c o s t i a R i v e r on a b r i d g e d o w n s t r e a m from the E a s t S t r e e t B r i d g e and on a n a l i g n m e n t w i t h I n d e p e n d e n c e c o n t i n u e s West o f t h e r i v e r tion located A r m o r y and ride s o u t h o f D.C. t h e D.C. facilities, over the stadium parking S t a d i u m and General Hospital. a thence under s t a t i o n a t N o r t h C a r o l i n a Avenue. The r o u t e t h e U.S. Capitol Building. the n o r t h , p a s s i n g b e n e a t h t h e e x i s t i n g U.S. the Senate Garage, i t joins include t h e B&O Pentagon Route. South Hayes kiss-and- parking Independence a t K e n t u c k y Avenue, From the C a p i t o l S t a t i o n , and c u r v e s Route Street, S.E., C a p i t o l grounds where east of the r o u t e c o n t i n u e s to S e n a t e subway and a p o r t i o n to the w e s t i n t o a t 1 s t S t r e e t , N.W., the alignment of D as d e s c r i b e d T h i s route begins i n the s o - c a l l e d City" located i n S t r e e t to i n c l u d e b u s - t r a n s f e r , k i s s - a n d - r i d e , 14 Street above. "Pentagon a r e a i n A r l i n g t o n County, V i r g i n i a , w i t h a t e r m i n a l s t a t i o n a widened D.C. then c o n t i n u e s under Avenue to F i r s t curves northward to a s t a t i o n i n s i d e where sta- S o u t h C a r o l i n a A v e n u e and P e n n s y l v a n i a A v e n u e t o the of l o t to a s u r f a c e t h e l i n e r u n s i n subway b e n e a t h P e n n s y l v a n i a A v e n u e and I n d e p e n d e n c e it line station w i l l A v e n u e and S o u t h C a r o l i n a A v e n u e t o i t s n e x t s t a t i o n and The t o a t o t a l o f 2500 s p a c e s . From the Stadium S t a t i o n , S.E., A v e n u e , S.E. and e n v i s a g e s maximum u t i l i z a t i o n o f e x i s t i n g areas i n the v i c i n i t y , Capitol a s h o r t d i s t a n c e from the This to and �parking f a c i l i t i e s will be (2000 s p a c e s ) . made w i t h i n the i n subway to transfer the the facility. operation) u n t i l the westward i n t o A r l i n g t o n the be a portal located and line The Lafayette also the line S h i r l e y H i g h w a y and which w i l l include con- a major bus- route proceeds northwest south of the b e n e a t h the e x t e n s i o n of (a along surface Marine Memorial. R o s s l y n commercial a route from t h i s A area. station F a i r f a x Counties. curves to alignment of H S t r e e t , Streets. terminal, o l d R o s s l y n B r a n c h , P e n n s y l v a n i a RR permit l a t e r From R o s s l y n the From t h i s south of Pentagon, the i t runs into Construction w i l l into a portal Pentagon S t a t i o n , multi-level station w i l l and to From the r i g h t - o f - w a y of f o r equipment s t o r a g e Pentagon C i t y area. p r o c e e d s n o r t h i n open c u t tinues Provision r o u t e merges w i t h the east b e n e a t h the N.W.,with s t a t i o n s River a t 2 3 r d and constructed Of the i n subway. t o accommodate 8 - c a r are 29 dictated by p l a t f o r m s , and stations C o n n e c t i c u t Avenue R o u t e 18th Square. Stations. the Potomac i n the P l a t f o r m s of trains. physical recommended s y s t e m , 20 a l l stations w i l l E x c e p t i n a few have e s c a l a t o r s providing f a r e c o l l e c t i o n and above. Stations Concession space w i l l will be well lighted be and c o m f o r t a b l e a s modern a r c h i t e c t u r a l d e s i g n c a n of glazed tile, structural glass, with durable, easily-cleaned will be facilitated Displacement. t r a n s i t r o u t e s has has been k e p t to units w i l l be by d i f f e r e n t color The by I t i s estimated 15 center stairs for level of the as attractive s t e e l or Walls w i l l other and be material stations schemes. construction b e e n c o n s i d e r e d c a r e f u l l y and displaced. long platforms Rapid i d e n t i f i c a t i o n of clearance required a minimum. and be stations. make them. b a k e d e n a m e l on surfaces. feet to both s i d e s i n many ventilated, as will have a mezzanine access provided have as w e l l A l l subway s t a t i o n s w i l l for centralized 600 c a s e s where s i d e movement b e t w e e n l e v e l s . street be limitations, a l l stations w i l l a l l stations w i l l beneath that relocation no of of rapid families more t h a n 128 family �Variants from P r i o r There posal: Recommendations, a r e t h r e e major changes from p r e v i o u s p l a n s i n the p r e s e n t (1) the Pentagon Route; the A n a c o s t i a Route; pro- ( 2 ) s u b s t i t u t i o n o f the Benning Route f o r ( 3 ) e l i m i n a t i o n o f t h e commuter r a i l r o a d l i n e to Bowie. 1. The P e n t a g o n r o u t e p r o v i d e s improved s e r v i c e by c o m b i n i n g two b r a n c h e s into a single to V i r g i n i a line, permitting more f r e q u e n t s c h e d u l i n g and b e t t e r u t i l i z a t i o n o f t r a i n s . 2. T h e B e n n i n g R o u t e s e r v e s more o f t h e b u i l t - u p a r e a o f t h e District was than justified, tial tor, A n a c o s t i a Route, i n t h e A g e n c y ' s o r i g i n a l p r o p o s a l , by a s a b e t t e r l o c a t i o n f o r s t o r a g e y a r d s and s h o p s . Commuter r a i l r o a d system, service t o Bowie i s n o t e s s e n t i a l i n v i e w o f change ways w i l l Express- r e a c h more d e s t i n a t i o n s i n t h e same a r e a . Transit Vehicles The system passenger i s being e q u i p m e n t f o r t h e recommended r a i l designed needs f o r comfort, The convenience,and transit and economy o f t i m e . A g e n c y h a s s t u d i e d and e v a l u a t e d a l l o f t h e t r a n s i t v e h i c l e and m o n o r a i l . manufacturers, including rubber-tired The A g e n c y i s c o o p e r a t i n g w i t h t r a n s i t and p l a n n e r s sys- S t a t e s and a b r o a d , and h a s c a r e f u l l y c o n s i d e r e d many new mass t r a n s p o r t a t i o n c o n c e p t s , vehicles rapid from the p o i n t o f view o f the passenger tems p r e s e n t l y i n u s e i n t h e U n i t e d i n other c i t i e s high-performance v e h i c l e o f advanced d e s i g n . be to the ( 2 ) . E x p r e s s bus s e r v i c e f r o m t h e B e n n i n g R o u t e v i a K e n i l w o r t h and A n n a p o l i s his poten- S e r v i c e t o t h e A r m o r y and t h e S t a d i u m i s a l s o a f a c - as w e l l initial Rapid which g r o w t h i n t h e "Henson C r e e k c o r r i d o r " i n P r i n c e G e o r g e s County. 3. the p r e v i o u s l y planned i n a continuing search f o r a A v a i l a b l e improvements incorporated i n the v e h i c l e s u l t i m a t e l y purchased 16 operators, will f o r u s e on t h e s y s t e m . �Equipment r e q u i r e m e n t s cars which w i l l and the latest C h i c a g o and are estimated i n c o r p o r a t e the engineering Toronto. The w i d t h o f 10 f e e t , w i l l latest cars w i l l Capital will q u i e t , and total estimated i n Table i n Table i n other cities c o s t o f c o n s t r u c t i n g and 3. 2 and A route-by-route d i s t a n c e s by These f i g u r e s take account of the experience similar facilities. Staging of The comfortable. and cost be The is estimates equipping the of other breakdown of the are contained estimate type of c o n s t r u c t i o n are cities and proposed and and engineering i t s consultants, i n designing profiles pre- or c o n s t r u c t - details i n the E n g i n e e r i n g and of the Supplement. Construction entire S e r v i c e w o u l d be system proposed here initiated two r o u t e , w h i c h must i n c l u d e the car-maintenance facilities. cart.be p u t i n t o o p e r a t i o n by y e a r s e a r l i e r , h o w e v e r , on one Operation through f r o m t h e P e n t a g o n , w h e r e many c o n v e r g e , t h r o u g h downtown t o t h e C a p i t o l and t r a v e l e d feeder-bus 1972. t e r m i n a l a t Benning Road, needed f o r i t s S t a d i u m , w i t h i t s e x t e n s i v e p a r k i n g , and at They w i l l are the r e s u l t of p r e l i m i n a r y Route plans construction cost estimate heavily hour. of r a p i d manufacturers. i s $431.0 m i l l i o n . presented lines capable overall c a r s i s $ 2 6 , 1 0 0 , 0 0 0 , and s t u d i e s c o n d u c t e d by NCTA's O f f i c e o f E n g i n e e r i n g ing be t o 75 m i l e s p e r c o s t of the r a p i d t r a n s i t from equipment facilities sented 75 f e e t i n l e n g t h , h a v e an in Cost The is be appointed, b a s e d upon a c t u a l c o s t e x p e r i e n c e obtained transit a v a i l a b l e high-performance f e a t u r e s s e a t 84 p a s s e n g e r s , and air-conditioned, attractively estimated rapid advances o f equipment r e c e n t l y i n t r o d u c e d a c c e l e r a t i o n p e r m i t t i n g s p e e d s o f up total t o c o n s i s t o f 184 eastward that r a i l 17 the to Benning Road, w i t h i t s l i n e s , w o u l d make a d r a m a t i c a v e r y e a r l y stage of the s e r v i c e to bus demonstration rapid transit can provide. �Table 2 ESTIMATED C A P I T A L COST (Millions of Dollars) connecticut Columbia Heights Avenue B&O Benning Pentagon Totals 59.5 28.8 48.8 66.9 65.8 269.8 0.6 0.3 0.2 4.0 0.6 5.7 T r a c k and S p e c i a l Work 1.6 0.7 3.5 2.5 2.1 10.4 Power D i s t r i b u t i o n 1.2 0.6 3.2 2.2 1.9 9.1 Signals & Interlocking 1.5 0.7 3.5 1.9 2.0 9.6 Communications 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.2 0.7 Substation Equipment 1.9 1.1 2.7 2.9 2.1 10.7 66.4 32.3 62.1 80.5 74.7 316.0 6.6 3.2 6.2 8.1 7.5 31.6 Right-of-way 0.8 2.3 7.3 4.4 5.7 20.5 Contingency ( 1 0 % ) 7.4 3.8 7.6 9.3 8.7 36.8 81.2 41.6 83.2 102.3 96.6 404.9 Basic Construction Public Utilities Sub-Total Construction Engineering (107,) T o t a l , e x c . V e h i c l e si 184 c a r s Vehicles, 26.1 Total 431.0 Other Open C o n struction Total System Table 3 .... DISTANCES BY T Y P E OF CONSTRUCTION (Miles) Cut & Cover Aerial Structure 1.9 1.7 0.3 Columbia H e i g h t s 1.5 0.4 - B&O 0.2 0.6 1.6 Railroad Right-ofWay b C Tunnel Route Connecticut Avenue a 6.6 - - 0.8 5.0 3.9 1.9 9.0 Benning 2.6 0.9 0.7 Pentagon 2.5 0.8 - 0.9 0.9 5.1 System 8.7 4.4 2.6 7.5 1.7 24.9 % of System 35.07, 17.77. 10.47, 30.17, 6.8% 100.0% %, o f U n d e r g r o u n d Construction 667, 347, Notes: Totals a b c Rock C r e e k & K l i n g l e V a l l e y B r i d g e s W a s h i n g t o n T e r m i n a l Company A n a c o s t i a R i v e r Bridge & Approaches 18 �TTT T R A N S I T REVENUES AND E X P E N S E S The Agency h a s e s t i m a t e d commercial s e r v i c e s , revenues from both passenger t r a f f i c i . e . , s a l e o f a d v e r t i s i n g , and l e a s i n g o f and from concessions. C a l c u l a t i o n s o f e x p e n s e s h a v e b e e n b a s e d on i n d u s t r y e x p e r i e n c e a p p l i e d t o specific schedules and operating conditions applicable t o the proposed system. Traffic The Agency h a s e s t i m a t e d system i n t h e National using public with use a rapid public C a p i t a l region transportation p e r c e n t t o 48 p e r c e n t . transit will raise o f t h e proposed r a p i d the percentage of persons are conservative, system i n operation a smaller t o 80 The in t o downtown W a s h i n g t o n t h a n i n a n y o t h e r i n North America. that T a b l e 4 shows t h a t r a p i d t r a n s i t will rapid cities such percentages ranging from percent. traffic the region, with and presume percentage of persons as C h i c a g o , P h i l a d e l p h i a , Boston, and Toronto a c h i e v e 70 transit t o downtown i n t h e p e a k - h o u r f r o m t h e p r e s e n t 4 0 These e s t i m a t e s transportation transit city that introduction f o r e c a s t s w e r e d e v e l o p e d by p r o j e c t i n g p r e s e n t r i d i n g together with rapid transit checked a g a i n s t an examination of the experience of other cities I n addition, systems. spot- the resulting f o r e c a s t s o f f u t u r e highway and p u b l i c p r e v i o u s l y made by t h e A g e n c y i n c o l l a b o r a t i o n w i t h ments and w e r e found t o a c c o r d w i t h T a b l e 4. habits these estimates were transportation the area highway usage depart- forecasts. PERCENT OF PEAK-HOUR TOTAL T R I P S TO DOWNTOWN BY P U B L I C TRANSPORTATION New Y o r k 90% Chicago 80% Philadelphia 75% Toronto 70% Boston 70% Cleveland 55% Washington 48%, a Estimate assuming i n t r o d u c t i o n transit facilities 19 of r a i l rapid �Estimates who w e r e made f o r t h r e e would f i n d transit with and rapid from the f e e d e r bus transit rapid them i n p a r k i n g transit areas and adjacent to the research on f e e t o f a s t a t i o n , and a s t a t i o n , w o u l d use the consistent with p u r p o s e s by t h e A g e n c y and transit in the Passengers. corridors t o be total the estimate of for the who would t r a n s f e r to the projected c u r v e s b a s e d on p e r c e n t a g e s , b a s e d on a rapid transit bus by be rapid surveys and lots w i l l fully A transit t o e::pect t r a f f i c are utilized. The total feet of Residential bus forecasting by the National purposes. passengers t r a v e l i n g The expanded to number o f bus e s t i m a t e d by use for account passengers of diversion Diversion f o r e a c h bus line of almost 12 000 parking passing s t a t i o n s on transit Agency has from t h i s to r a p i d rapid parking transit lots system. i n other cities, f o r e c a s t s assume t h a t not included cars i n the on these traffic surface streets i n d i c a t e s i t w o u l d be reasonable source. transit u s e d by the might p a r k t h e i r rapid transit s y s t e m s show t h a t s t a t i o n s a c c o u n t f o r b e t w e e n 5 and of downtown-destined peak hour r a p i d 5 p e r c e n t f i g u r e was spaces 5 s t a t i o n s , though e x p e r i e n c e of other c i t i e s w i t h driven s y s t e m was 1500 within Downtown employment e s t i m a t e was the Agency's t r a f f i c f o r e c a s t s p o t e n t i a l p a s s e n g e r s who who transit system form the b a s i s were c a l c u l a t e d to v a r i o u s i n Cleveland, Studies park station. particularly near rapid within experience i n other c i t i e s . e x p e r i e n c e of comparable r a p i d be rapid used f o r t r a f f i c transit This transit time savings, provided adjacent B a s e d on Census. i n downtown employment. Passengers Using Automobiles. will rapid to Washington from work. counts of c u r r e n t the connect driven a u t o s and current downtown a r e a 1960 rapid s e r v i c e s to development p l a n n i n g passengers. increase field Actual served B a s e d on h i g h w a y d e p a r t m e n t s and C a p i t a l P l a n n i n g Commission f o r g e n e r a l F e e d e r Bus nearest stations. s y s t e m t o and from the area bus i n c i t i e s with those p r e v i o u s l y the the p e r c e n t of a l l persons r e s i d i n g working i n the p o p u l a t i o n f i g u r e s were d e r i v e d ( a ) persons w o u l d e i t h e r be transit riding habits rapid figures are rapid 70 homes and would d r i v e t h e i r from S t a t i o n s . that traffic: would use ( c ) p e r s o n s who s t a t i o n s o r who s y s t e m s , the Agency e s t i m a t e d 1500 p a s s e n g e r s who s y s t e m , and P a s s e n g e r s W a l k i n g t o and riding habits sources of i t c o n v e n i e n t to w a l k between t h e i r s t a t i o n ; (b) the potential transit 15 percent r i d e r s h i p i n these c i t i e s . the Agency i n c a l c u l a t i n g such 20 persons patronage. A �Total Y e a r l y Passengers. t o p r o d u c e i n 1980 a total trips estimated either 20 p e r c e n t lower passing than traffic maximum l o a d p o i n t . t h a t Washington has -- those beginning cities, Several t h e maximum l o a d p o i n t . the experience o f T o r o n t o and A l s o , the percentage does not a good d e a l more t o u r i s t and that i t i s v i r t u a l l y t h a t c o u l d be use t h e subway expected daily ridership. the l a t e s t a v a i l a b l e industry experience. m u l t i p l i e d by factor, the and ending their traffic certain too, to is P h i l a d e l p h i a , i n both of t r a f f i c passing than e i t h e r of the fact these t h a t a g r e a t many tourists system. to use the r a p i d t r a n s i t system ridership i n 1980 T h i s percentage data f o r D. Second, the r e s u l t i n g 299.6 t o o b t a i n a n C. i s higher Transit than and estimate of t o t a l 13.5 that accords estimate of t o t a l in for that year. assumed t h a t morning peak-hour r i d e r s h i p would r e p r e s e n t of t o t a l i n d i c a t e d by was passing f a c t o r s w e r e a p p l i e d t o t h e e s t i m a t e o f t h e t o t a l number o f i t was percent estimated t a k e i n t o account the the morning peak hour to o b t a i n an e s t i m a t e of t o t a l First, were This percentage amounts t o more t h a n 30 p e r c e n t v i s i t i n g Washington w i l l passengers of t r a f f i c t o t h e downtown a r e a i n t h e m o r n i n g p e a k h o u r . that l o c a l passengers of those of which l o c a l two sources i n s i d e o r o u t s i d e t h e maximum l o a d p o i n t -- w o u l d amount substantially other foregoing o f 50,797 r a p i d t r a n s i t p a s s e n g e r s maximum l o a d p o i n t en r o u t e I t was The daily with ridership yearly ridership. This i s i n accordance w i t h i n d u s t r y experience. Revenues Passenger Revenue. passenger t r a f f i c rapid transit The f o r 1980 Agency's e s t i m a t e of t o t a l y e a r l y i s shown i n T a b l e 7, page 25. f a r e o f 25 c e n t s a t a l l s t a t i o n s except on the f u r t h e r assumption t h a t the r a p i d t r a n s i t 12.5 cents transit retain f o r e a c h f e e d e r bus system the remaining Other Revenue. 12.5 zone. The be Spring and 35 c e n t s , and system would r e c e i v e only passenger t r a n s f e r r i n g w i t h i n the 25-cent from T h i s i s b a s e d on Silver Woodside, o u t s i d e the D i s t r i c t L i n e , where the f a r e w i l l revenue to or from the r a p i d p r i v a t e bus operators would cents. I n a d d i t i o n to passenger r e v e n u e s , t h a t revenue a c c r u i n g from a d v e r t i s i n g , s i m i l a r a c t i v i t i e s w o u l d amount t o one the l e a s i n g cent per i t was estimated of concessions passenger. ,and (See Table 7) a �Expenses I n order to obtain operating cost estimates, d e v e l o p e d by t h e Agency f o r t h e e n t i r e r a p i d were designed of to provide c a p a c i t y the e s t imated t r a f f i c t r a i n schedules were transit system. These i n peak and o f f - p e a k p e r i o d s w i t h o u t undue d e l a y o r a n e x c e s s i v e schedules to c a r r y a l l number o f standees. On t h e b a s i s o f t h e s e s c h e d u l e s , t h e c o n s u l t i n g engineering firms of C o v e r d a l e and C o l p i t t s and K a i s e r E n g i n e e r s developed f o r t h e Agency an analysis For of a l l costs t h a t w o u l d be i n c u r r e d e a c h f a c e t o f t h e o p e r a t i o n -- e . g . , m a i n t e n a n c e , s t a t i o n train s c h e d u l e s -- t h e c o n s u l t i n g number o f p e r s o n n e l accord with the s a f e t y and o p e r a t i n g current engineers prepared estimates t h a t w o u l d be r e q u i r e d . T h e s e manpower p r a c t i c e s of the rapid W o r k - r u l e s and w o r k i n g c o n d i t i o n s of i n the o p e r a t i o n of the system. operations, of the t o t a l requirements transit industry. w e r e a s s u m e d t o be t h o s e s e t f o r t h i n a g r e e m e n t b e t w e e n D. C. T r a n s i t S y s t e m , I n c . , a n d D i v i s i o n 689 t h e Amalgamated T r a n s i t U n i o n , AFL-CIO. Operating Expenses. the basis of the current Wage r a t e s a n d a n n u a l s a l a r i e s a g r e e m e n t b e t w e e n D. C. T r a n s i t a n d D i v i s i o n 6 8 9 . Where D. C. T r a n s i t p r e s e n t l y with rapid transit w e r e e s t i m a t e d on has j o b c l a s s i f i c a t i o n s job classifications, T r a n s i t were used i n e s t i m a t i n g rapid t h a t a r e comparable t h e wage r a t e s a d h e r e d t o by D. C. t r a n s i t wage c o s t s . Where t h e r e were no c o m p a r a b l e j o b c l a s s i f i c a t i o n s , wage r a t e s w e r e e s t i m a t e d on t h e b a s i s o f the existing i n New Y o r k . in the rapid Since be differentials on o t h e r r a p i d Administrative transit w e r e b a s e d on s a l a r y l e v e l s that prevailing that the proposed r a p i d rail facilities will f o r o p e r a t i o n b y p r i v a t e e n t e r p r i s e , a sum h a s b e e n added to t h e e s t i m a t e o f g e n e r a l of an o p e r a t i n g systems, p r i n c i p a l l y industry. i ti s anticipated contracted-out salaries transit contract. and a d m i n i s t r a t i v e costs to cover t h e expense �A summary o f o p e r a t i n g e x p e n s e s f o r 1980, i n c l u d i n g a 10%, c o n t i n g e n c y i t e m , when m e a s u r e d a g a i n s t car-miles w i l l result i n an rapid transit The estimated operation cost after i s shown i n T a b l e the Agency's estimate h a v e t o be allowing Table the 10 p e r c e n t for contingencies 5. Annual OPERATING EXPENSE FOR (thousands of 1980 dollars) & S t r u c t u r e (9.60 per & Damage ( 6 . 4 6 cents cents per per 913. 4 car-mile) 389. 2 car-mile) (22.17 c e n t s per 2,110. 1 car-mile) 1,749. 1 car-mile) c e n t s per car-mile) & A d m i n i s t r a t i v e (16.70 cents Operating per 615. 0 car-mile) 1,590. 0 Expense 7,366. 8 Contingency Total Operating Depreciation Expense. 736. 7 Expenses The expenses, covering booths, w i r i n g , items 8,103. 5 b a s i s f o r the Agency's e s t i m a t e a n n u a l equipment d e p r e c i a t i o n annually. car-mile. 9,519,000 Power ( 1 8 . 3 7 c e n t s These other c e n t s per i s included. 305.2 Conducting T r a n s p o r t a t i o n ciation traffic Depreciation Maintenance of Equipment (4.09 for i s 85.13 Factor M a i n t e n a n c e o f Way 10% o f 9,519,000 31,190 Operating Expenses: General expenses, contingency item Car-miles Injury but c a r - m i l e f o r the Washington Car-miles Annualization These t o accommodate f o r e c a s t c o s t o f 77.39 c e n t s p e r before 5. depreciation that a total operated each year Excluding Daily excluding e x p e n s e i s shown i n T a b l e such as t u r n s t i l e s , e t c . , have been e s t i m a t e d 23 $848,796 Other depre- ticket of operating t o amount t o T o t a l annual d e p r e c i a t i o n expense i s thus 6. escalators, at 6 percent d e p r e c i a t i o n expenses are estimated of expenses $486,600 estimated at $1,334,800 �T a b l e 6. Vehicles D E P R E C I A T I O N ON RAPID TRANSIT VEHICLES Required 184 Average Cost Per V e h i c l e $141,939 Investment $26,116,800 Residual at Depreciable $652,920 2%% Base $25,463,880 A n n u a l D e p r e c i a t i o n O v e r 30 Summary o f R e v e n u e s and $848,796 Years Expenses T a b l e 7 shows t h e A g e n c y ' s e s t i m a t e o f 1980 debt s e r v i c e c h a r g e s . and revenues a v a i l a b l e t o meet T o t a l operating revenue i s estimated a t $26,991,000, o p e r a t i n g expense, i n c l u d i n g d e p r e c i a t i o n , i s e s t i m a t e d a t $9,439,000. Thus, t o t a l y e a r l y revenues, s e r v i c e charges t o meet d e b t f o r t h the Agency's e s t i m a t e of t o t a l y e a r l y revenues e x p e n s e s f o r t h e y e a r 1970 when i t i s e s t i m a t e d be depreciation, available i s e s t i m a t e d a t $17,552,000. Table 8 sets system w i l l after and then f o r each succeeding year u n t i l t h a t the debt i n c u r r e d f o r the c o n s t r u c t i o n of repaid. 24 2010 the and �T a b l e 7. . 1980 REVENUES A V A I L A B L E TO MEET DEBT S E R V I C E (In Gross Passenger Thousands o f Net Payment t o F e e d e r Passenger Dollars) 34,657 Revenue Maximum L o a d P o i n t T r a f f i c 2 Local Traffic Less: 1 29,020 5,637 Bus 9,019 25,638 Revenue 4 N o n - F a r e Box 1,353 Revenue TOTAL OPERATING REVENUE O p e r a t i n g and M a i n t e n a n c e CHARGES 26,991 8,104 Expense"' Depreciation^ 1,335 Vehicle 849 Other 486 9,439 TOTAL OPERATING EXPENSE REVENUE A V A I L A B L E TO MEET DEBT SERVICE 17,552 CHARGE A F T E R D E P R E C I A T I O N 1 Based on a n n u a l maximum l o a d t r a f f i c 2 Based on 2 2 , 5 4 6 , 3 3 8 a n n u a l 3 B a s e d on 7 2 , 1 4 8 , 2 8 3 a n n u a l p a s s e n g e r s a t 1 2 . 5 c p e r p a s s e n g e r o f w h i c h 6 7 , 6 3 9 , 0 1 5 p a s s e n g e r s r e p r e s e n t 6 0 % o f maximum l o a d t r a f f i c and 4 , 5 0 9 , 2 6 8 p a s s e n g e r s r e p r e s e n t 20%, o f l o c a l t r a f f i c . 4 Based 5 See T a b l e 5. 6 See T a b l e 6. on 1 3 5 , 2 7 8 , 0 2 9 t o t a l of 112,731,691. passengers. p a s s e n g e r s u s i n g s y s t e m , a t l£ each. �Table 8 ESTIMATED REVENUES AND EXPENSES (In Fiscal Year Gross Revenues $ thousands of Operating Expenses Excluding Depreciation dollars) Revenues Before Depreciation $ $ Net Depreciation $ Revenues After Depreciation $ 1970 1971 1972 1973 1974 1,619 6,748 13,496 17,544 20,243 3,242 6,888 7,091 7,294 7,415 -(1,623) -(140) 6,405 10,250 12,828 1,201 1,274 1,287 1,294 -(1,623) -(1,341) 5,131 8,963 11,534 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 22,942 24,292 24,967 25,641 26,316 7,537 7,658 7,780 7,901 8,023 15,405 16,634 17,187 17,740 18,293 1,301 1,308 1,316 1,323 1,330 14,104 15,326 15,871 16,417 16,963 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 26,991 27,261 27,534 27,809 28,087 8,104 8,185 8,267 8,350 8,434 18,887 19,076 19,267 19,459 19,653 1,335 1,340 1,345 1,350 1,355 17,552 17,736 17,922 18,109 18,298 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 28,368 28,652 28,939 29,228 29,520 8,518 8,603 8,689 8,776 8,864 19,850 20,049 20,250 20,452 20,656 1,360 1,365 1,370 1,376 1,381 18,490 18,684 18,880 19,076 19,275 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 29,815 30,014 30,214 30,416 30,619 8,953 9,013 9,073 9,134 9,195 20,862 21,001 21,141 21,282 21,424 1,386 1,390 1,393 1,397 1,401 19,476 19,611 19,748 19,885 20,023 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 30,823 31,029 31,236 31,444 31,654 9,256 9,318 9,380 9,443 9,506 21,567 21,711 21,856 22,001 22,148 1,404 1,408 1,412 1,416 1,419 20,163 20,303 20,444 20,585 20,729 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 31,865 31,971 32,077 32,184 32,291 9,569 9,601 9,633 9,665 9,697 22,296 22,370 22,444 22,519 22,594 1,423 1,425 1,427 1,429 1,431 20,873 20,945 21,017 21,090 21,163 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 32,398 32,506 32,614 32,723 32,832 32,941 9,729 9,761 9,794 9,827 9,860 9,893 22,669 22,745 22,820 22,896 22,972 23,048 1,433 1,435 1,437 1,439 1,441 1,443 21,236 21,310 21,383 21,457 21,531 21,605 1,129,863 354,919 774,944 55,000 719,944 TOTAL 26 �f t r FINANCING THE T R A N S I T DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM Source o f Funds It i s estimated equip the r a i l funds should District that i t w i l l rapid transit cost system. $431 m i l l i o n l/J-2/3 basis. c o n t r i b u t e o n e - t h i r d , and the F e d e r a l Governl o s s e s should o f C o l u m b i a and t h e F e d e r a l G o v e r n m e n t The grant formula these and l o a n s ; t h a t t h e ment t w o - t h i r d s , o f t h e g r a n t s ; and t h a t u n r e c o v e r a b l e b o r n e by t h e D i s t r i c t and The Agency h a s c o n c l u d e d t h a t j e r a i s e d by a c o m b i n a t i o n o f g r a n t s of Columbia should to construct i s consistent with be on t h e same that established by t h e U r b a n Mass T r a n s p o r t a t i o n A c t o f 1964. The Agency e s t i m a t e s percent of the cost Thus, the users of the system w i l l payment total of i n t e r e s t bond $281 m i l l i o n of grants. The Agency and i n t e r e s t An a d d i t i o n a l $52 m i l l i o n w i l l Bonds: provide o f C o l u m b i a $50 and i n t e r e s t sale by t h e be r e q u i r e d t o would provide $100 by t h e F e d e r a l G o v e r n m e n t $333 m i l l i o n . 27 million million. P u b l i c s a l e o f t a x a b l e bonds u n d e r w r i t t e n principal recom- cover the c o n s t r u c t i o n p e r i o d , making the The F e d e r a l Government the D i s t r i c t percent be r a i s e d t h r o u g h t h e p u b l i c as t o p r i n c i p a l charges during 35 Plan Grants: 65 of t h e f i n a n c i a l burden. i s s u e $333 m i l l i o n . The F i n a n c i n g and to cover to finance the remaining o f $150 m i l l i o n bonds, u n d e r w r i t t e n F e d e r a l Government. bear t h e bulk be r e q u i r e d - i.e., a total mends t h a t t h e r e m a i n i n g of t a x a b l e be s u f f i c i e n t o f c o n s t r u c t i n g , f i n a n c i n g and e q u i p p i n g t h e s y s t e m . Grant c o n t r i b u t i o n s w i l l of t h e c o s t that revenues w i l l as t o would �Timing outlays, of C a p i t a l Outlays. together w i t h sources of c a p i t a l , F e d e r a l and D i s t r i c t first T a b l e 9 shows t h e s c h e d u l e of c a p i t a l f o r the p e r i o d 1966-1975. o f Columbia g r a n t s p r o v i d e a l l needed funds f o r the two y e a r s o f d e s i g n and c o n s t r u c t i o n and t h e b u l k o f t h e f u n d s f o r the t h i r d y e a r . T h e r e a f t e r , the p r i v a t e T A B L E 9. l o a n s w o u l d be r e q u i r e d . SCHEDULE OF C A P I T A L OUTLAYS BY SOURCE (Thousands of D o l l a r s ) Total Grants Fiscal Revenue Year Bonds Capital Federal - 1966 1967 5,733 17,200 35,400 17,700 53,100 53,133 26,567 85,200 - 5,500 1969 109,000 1970 114,000 - 1971 73,500 - 1972 21,000 1973 5,500 1974 3,500 1975 1,000 333,000 Includes Outlays C. 11,467 1968 Total D. a $52 m i l l i o n 100,000 109,000 114,000 73,500 21,000 5,500 - 3,500 - 1,000 483,000 50,000 t o c o v e r payment o f i n t e r e s t c h a r g e s during construction. Repayment. in Table 2010. 10. At that The a n t i c i p a t e d I t i s expected t h a t a l l bonds w i l l be r e t i r e d by t h e y e a r t i m e , t h e s y s t e m w o u l d be d e b t - f r e e w i t h a d e q u a t e f u n d s i n a d e p r e c i a t i o n account e q u i p m e n t and s c h e d u l e - f o r r e p a y m e n t o f bonds i s shown to ensure facilities. the continuance o f modern and efficient �T¿ble 10 ANTI.CIPATED PAYO Capital Outlavs -- Financed by $150 Million In Goverlrnent Equity and $333 Milllon In Prfvate Loans (4à% Non-Tax Exe¡rpt FederaLl-v Unden¡rftten) ' Estimated Prlncipal and Interest Pâl¡ments Assumlng That Excess Net Revenues Are Used to Retire Bonds Prfor to Maturiw (Thousands of Dollars) AnnuaL Net Revenue FlscaL Deprec 1a tlon Interest CapitaL Outlays Before Account Fund Depreclation (Cumulative) @ 3-3/4% $ Year $ $ L966 1969 102, 100 After 9! Deprecfation $ t97 L 58, 600 r972 11,300 Equlty Private Loans L7 79,700 5,500 ,000 114,000 73.500 21,000 5,500 3,500 1,000 228,500 302 ,000 323,000 328,500 332,000 L0,282 l"3,5go L4,535 L4,782 L4,940 L4,985 333,000 333,000 333,000 332,000 33 1,500 14,985 L4 1985 14,985 14,985 L7,736 L7 ,922 18,109 18,298 18,490 330,500 329,500 323,000 3 18 ,000 14,918 L4,872 L4,828 L4,738 L4,535 L976 L6 634 7,665 L5,326 L977 t7 L87 8,981 15,87 L7 1980 18 887 1981 L9 198? 1983 L984 19, 267 19, 459 19, 6s3 1985 1986 L987 1988 740 ,07 6 l0, 5, 13L 8, 963 11, 534 L4 104 L,7 17 L4 309 15 654 333, o0o 1 16,4L7 L6,963 L7 ,552 304 LL,634 L2,969 486 436 L4,985 L4,985 L4,940 T7 537 587 19, 850 19 638 688 L 739 18, 684 3r2, 500 t4 310 2L,616 22,554 775 811 18 306, 500 23,49O u6 ,880 L9,076 1989 t-990 20,049 20,250 20,452 20,656 L9,275 292, 500 20,862 24,424 881 L9,476 285, 000 L4 062 13 792 13 478 13 162 199 1 21,001 25,355 916 19,611 277 t992 2L,r4L 26,281 1.9,748 268, 500 1993 2L,282 2L,424 2L,567 27 951 986 19, 885 1,020 1,055 20,023 20,L63 259,000 248,500 238,000 2L,7 LL 2L1856 29,959 30,875 1998 L999 22,00L 22,L49 3 1,089 L,L23 1,158 20, 303 L997 2000 22,296 2001 2002 2003 2004 22,370 22,444 22,519 22,594 2005 22,669 12,669 2006 22,745 22,820 13 s63 L4 452 15 339 16 225 L994 L995 L996 2007 2008 22,896 2009 22,97 2010 TOTAL 431,000 2 23,048 774,944 004 18 359 7L9 20,67 ,204 28,L24 29,042 327 ,5OO 299, 500 227 ,00O 2 L5 2O2,50O 32,703 33,6 15 L,r92 r,226 20,87 3 l0,870 L,26L 20,945 9,972 10,874 408 374 408 44L 2L,OL7 rL,773 L7 109 ,000 20,444 20,585 20,729 1,7 90 ,500 12,825 12,465 L2,082 l1,655 1 1, 182 10 7 10 10 2 15 9 6 98 Balance L4,zLo 16,611 L9' 238 5, ooo L9, 535 L6,57 5 533 623 635 5,500 6,000 19,810 20,062 645 65s 17 ,468 L7 ,06 1 L7 ,7 L6 7, ooo 20,7 92 16,811 664 L7,475 ,000 ,500 20,478 20,662 t7, 6s5 666 17,773 8 000 20,825 20,965 t7 ,836 500 10 500 10 500 2L,582 22,L55 2L,682 I 680 694 710 710 18,5 L6 8 500 L8,077 69s L8,772 11,000 2L,7 L0 2L,7 L5 L8,454 19,010 l8 ,77 3 L8,822 L8,648 704 7L8 740 19, 158 732 L9,554 19,381 4,500 7 7 9 I 1, 500 23,352 22,L55 2L,980 22,282 22,540 15,500 155 15, 000 12,000 94,500 6, 480 5, 782 5, 040 15,500 16,500 t7 ,500 18,000 19,000 20,500 20, 500 2L,3LO 76,500 4,252 1,383 2L,457 57,500 37,000 t 6,500 3,442 2,599 L,665 2!,53r 2L,605 t9,944 11,203 7, 852 2 I 150, 000 333,OOo ly' 742 WN 605 420 15,918 L5,872 16 ,828 505 47s 10 23 57 113 322 1,000 1,000 2,000 7, 128,500 595 1,491 254 10,881 15,440 I 1 254 13,790 16,078 16,309 500 159,000 144,000 2L,09O 4L 135 2t8 14, 985 15, 985 22,698 22,6L2 9 1 L2 360 5,698 8,359 1, 000 89,000 174,500 1 2r,L63 2r,236 7 -F- --r 1,514 3,003 5,811 8,577 13,000 13,500 14,500 509 542 575 608 25,458 - @ 3-3/47.21 95 64 r97 5 18 293 -il 'it, 13,590 14,535 L4,782 L4,940 l-4,985 2,47 5 L97 9 248 Balance lance t0,282 3,762 5,056 6,357 1978 Ba l-00 6,405 L974 Cash Service 5,152 10,250 L2,828 L5,405 r973 L Payments On Cash 5,152 -1, 623 -L, 34L t,ìõt L40 Pr inc ipa TotaL Debt ä' 5,500 1L4,500 109 L,623 Lnterest on ,200 53 ¡ 100 - Loans Outstanding @-U% $$$$$$ $ 53,100 84,800 103,900 t970 Lnterest Private Loans Revenue L7 ,2OO 1967 r-968 Total Net On DeÞreclatlon 16,500 333Fõõ 23,005 2,946 16,823 118 L7,468 18,250 L8,233 17 ,83 733 L7,zLO 18, 134 L8,944 18,943 18,540 L9,728 19, 5 13 7LL L8,962 L8,943 710 L9,L37 7L8 L9,L44 718 18, 999 t8,532 712 L9,244 L8,694 722 728 T9,4t6 18,235 L8,232 L8,427 727 18,426 18,281 22,252 22,442 23,088 22,L65 18, 996 L7,242 24,682 w L6,932 L8,327 7L5 739 2õ;ß 19, 055 19,7 LL 25,42L g/" Use of lnterest from depreciatlon account deferred untll flrst year of debt retírement -Þ/ No interest on cash baLance account assumed during the period in whlch private loans are issued g/ Includes $281 nlllion for payment of capltal costs and $52 ¡níllfon for payment of interest during constructÍon Natlonal Capf ta1 Transportation Agency �ORGANIZATION AND It and will OPERATION i s proposed t h a t t h e Agency undertake the work o f c o n s t r u c t i n g equipping the system. be made t o o b t a i n I n t h e meantime, i t i s e x p e c t e d t h a t e n a c t m e n t s by t h e l e g i s l a t u r e s o f V i r g i n i a a n d M a r y l a n d o f t h e i n t e r s t a t e c o m p a c t c o n t e m p l a t e d by T i t l e National C a p i t a l T r a n s p o r t a t i o n A c t o f 1960. e n a c t e d by t h e S t a t e s i t w i l l be t r a n s m i t t e d Following such approval, President to the Congress of a plan for efforts Title I I I provides the system from t h e N a t i o n a l I I I of the Once t h e c o m p a c t h a s b e e n to t h e Congress f o r approval. f o r t h e s u b m i s s i o n by t h e for transferring responsibility C a p i t a l T r a n s p o r t a t i o n Agency t o t h e compact agency. Pending the establishment o f t h e compact agency, t h e powers under t h e 1960 A c t and t h o s e sought i n t h e p r e s e n t sufficient system. to permit granted legislation will t h e Agency t o b e g i n a t once w i t h c o n s t r u c t i o n o f t h e I f the contemplated i n t e r s t a t e compact, w i t h a p p r o p r i a t e financing p o w e r s , h a s b e e n a p p r o v e d by t h e t i m e a d d i t i o n a l f u n d s f o r c a p i t a l a r e needed, t h e i n t e r s t a t e agency thus c r e a t e d would c o n t i n u e t i o n and d e v e l o p p l a n s question It f o r a d d i t i o n s and e x t e n s i o n s . o f o r g a n i z a t i o n a n d f i n a n c e c a n be r e v i e w e d legislation be enacted to provide f o r continued outlay the construc- I f n o t , then the and appropriate construction. i s p r o p o s e d t h a t t h e s y s t e m be o p e r a t e d by a p r i v a t e company. Examination of the experience of other c i t i e s w h e r e mass t r a n s p o r t a t i o n s y s t e m s a r e p u b l i c l y owned b u t managed b y p r i v a t e o p e r a t o r s has persuaded t h e A g e n c y t h a t a s a t i s f a c t o r y a r r a n g e m e n t c a n be w o r k e d o u t w i t h a p r i v a t e operator protect In that w i l l the public i n t e r e s t each o f t h e c i t i e s between t h e c i t y concerned s h a l l interest: etc. provide efficient operation i n the rapid t r a n s i t provides r e t a i n c o n t r o l over key questions schedules, adequately facilities. r e f e r r e d t o a b o v e , t h e management and t h e p r i v a t e o p e r a t o r fares, and w i l l contract that the public affecting agency the public purchase o f equipment, maintenance policies, S u c h c o n t r o l s w o u l d be r e t a i n e d by t h e A g e n c y u n d e r a n y a r r a n g e m e n t w i t h a p r i v a t e operator. A l s o , under t h e Agency's p r o p o s a l , any such arrangement would i n c l u d e p r o v i s i o n s f o r t h e p r o t e c t i o n of t h e r i g h t s of existing t r a n s i t company e m p l o y e e s . provided n a t i o n a l l y under t h e Urban Mass T r a n s p o r t a t i o n A c t o f 1964. 31 T h e s e w o u l d be t h e same a s t h o s e �TTT THE CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS P R I N C I P A L TRANSPORTATION PROBLEM c o n f r o n t i n g t h e N a t i o n a l r e g i o n , and e v e r y o t h e r ing traffic congestion large metropolitan a r e a , i s the ever caused Capital increas- by t h e movement o f m u l t i t u d e s o f p e o p l e t o a n d f r o m t h e i r p l a c e s o f employment d u r i n g a f e w h o u r s o f p e a k demand e a c h d a y . THE by SOLUTION TO THE PROBLEM i s t o d e v e l o p a n a l t e r n a t i v e automobile that w i l l offer work t r a n s p o r t a t i o n and w i l l more e f f e c t i v e l y convenient, enable by e n c o u r a g i n g to travel f a s t , e c o n o m i c a l home-to- t h e highway system some p e o p l e who m i g h t to function otherwise d r i v e t o make u s e o f p u b l i c t r a n s p o r t a t i o n . The Agency Concludes That: c T h e m o s t e f f i c i e n t a n d e c o n o m i c a l method o f t r a n s p o r t i n g l a r g e n u m b e r s o f p e o p l e d u r i n g p e a k demand p e r i o d s i s by h i g h - c a p a c i t y , high-performance r a i l r a p i d t r a n s i t . o Such a system i n v o l v e s m i n i m a l r i g h t - o f - w a y r e q u i r e m e n t s , p r e s e r v e s t a x a b l e p r o p e r t y , reduces the problem o f d i s p l a c i n g and r e l o c a t i n g f a m i l i e s and b u s i n e s s e s t a b l i s h m e n t s , and r e d u c e s t h e b u r d e n o f t r a f f i c on s t r e e t s a n d h i g h w a y s . o By u t i l i z i n g underground r o u t e s , t h e i n t e g r i t y o f n e i g h b o r h o o d s a n d c e n t r a l W a s h i n g t o n w i l l be p r o t e c t e d a n d t h e b e a u t y and d i g n i t y o f t h e N a t i o n ' s C a p i t a l p r e s e r v e d . o T h e downtown subway a n d t h e n e t w o r k o f r a p i d t r a n s i t r o u t e s d e s c r i b e d i n t h i s T r a n s i t Development Program a r e n o t o n l y required but a r e economically p r a c t i c a b l e . The A g e n c y Recommends: o T h a t t h e Congress a u t h o r i z e t h e Agency t o undertake development o f t h e r a i l r a p i d t r a n s i t s y s t e m d e s c r i b e d i n t h i s r e p o r t and d e t a i l e d i n t h e E n g i n e e r i n g S u p p l e m e n t . o That Congress a p p r o p r i a t e t h e funds the T r a n s i t Development Program. 32 GS A DC 6 5 - 87 3 4 necessary t o implement ��NCTA RAIL RAPID TRANSIT � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Rail rapid transit for the Nation's Capital : transit development program 1965 Subject The topic of the resource Rail transit Rapid transit Light rail transit Description An account of the resource Rail rapid transit for the National Capital region: hearings, Eighty-ninth Congress, first session on H.R. 4822 and S. 1117, to authorize the prosecution of a transit development program for the National Capital region, July 20, 21, and 23, 1965 Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource National Capital Transportation Agency (U.S.) Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource January 1965 Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource Documents Language A language of the resource English Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource DDOT Historical Reports & Other Documents Subject The topic of the resource Transportation--Research--United States Transportation--Planning Description An account of the resource District Department of Transportation's historical reports and other documents. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Various Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource Documents Language A language of the resource English Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource Various Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource District Department of Transportation Document A resource containing textual data. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Mass Transit Subject The topic of the resource Bus lanes Buses Mass transit Rail transit Rapid transit Light rail transit Description An account of the resource Historical reports and documents related to mass transit in the Washington, D.C. area. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Various Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource Various Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource Documents Language A language of the resource English Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Bus Transit Buses https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/13460/archive/files/52209bcccfaa17ae5c18839f21d46d8c.jpg?Expires=1779321600&Signature=fU-GD11hM3A7j6TXfnNctP7ekjQbHILu7hR-5umubi1e3yZr537ZaNV-mZQSNLasC11cPc%7Eu7iS5n68FffH46KAp-PBfZYuoyraWwwjeLrMTzDRxUdaBWULzvRlNIT9G%7EqaWfd0qHMSaf-iEVySFbVAdWHcuJaMVHVI%7Eqgo49iW-KknGQzMqnIKCzXg4LsrxrE2zVJ4K0d4GQo6-CB9OpTFTCaUWfaLs7pKSXje8%7E%7EnT62f88hq23gPDloPpB0yHbi%7EHpH8d8I-uKsImYhbyQDjpPihxFIRwS8Iy9k4%7Edalzotsv77bu9g-9wswrVH1Vk8GKk%7E8pm-yAAtnTY8U4Pg__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM 51fff0c4360e40f805bdad4cf4073ce4 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Public Transit 004 Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource District Department of Transportation Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource June 16, 1972 Subject The topic of the resource Buses Pedestrians Bus stops Description An account of the resource Women at a bus stop. Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource Public domain Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource Photographs Language A language of the resource English Type The nature or genre of the resource Prints https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/13460/archive/files/8d3e3c682e591b341ad480b896f2d086.jpg?Expires=1779321600&Signature=i%7E9WardB1sbzifMf9ZZP4h5wcxUba87510lVUWPsblTXcyDIxDEllcn821F%7EgogKA84LKO1Zk-gtaqjgUezz46fe3x7O4J9Bjmci16Qn6yY7qRdEjDoEb%7Eb2JLP4v14kPl9rQhRFTssuwRDVtxmaj%7ENl2I%7EKKer-NAJdGLaqEvc%7E1stowNtPZK-bCSbnqYM0Wt9I-zptYnvFiKeK0lXiuAAyJpKaDrWh6gojkL2uBugTT7SkfSPAbpjI4jicu2h2i73O3xF%7EKdV37Hu4S2hENFliFEkzgbyC7oCIWfV85lN%7EBkpvQMhUC0TUb8YwRd7eN6MRFjxzZN4Yz0GTf1W3tA__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM caa538e7d3f6aae427d152697fc51ccc Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Public Transit 003 Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource District Department of Transportation Subject The topic of the resource Buses Signs Fares Description An account of the resource Sign on a bus displaying the fare. Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource Photographs Language A language of the resource English Type The nature or genre of the resource Prints https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/13460/archive/files/cf29c5dddae5e4adc791269773f9a9c6.jpg?Expires=1779321600&Signature=JZeDe5auKel4PHJTVl8QpLaqhhsyqAEzuZB6OQJQIx8P5lZ7SZ5p32G7Kyx6ywl8PHno%7EDsoZmjcNJzMiUakDa1hznuoyUQ0fkZRkE0jJcGERUKP29qXSv%7EAE4DSrtxYw52%7E5gJCgVNxqiCFDMmovRApAAPqLHoCoAF-M8AkUML1nfMIx2hix4vxxD5z0lW8qmIFZVy6i9JWmuHRwfVRqR8rO353BvLjZg8PVLI95U-OCrzhZK9fy0M-Q2QoRijRmaPhCtxNirbFcS3TZlA%7Ewr3f4WGKXvWPqwZuXkN3eQhplAbFKNNwRP2cvszLR0c-SbZI9riwy09XDaAUVNeu6w__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM 0b0f0fce25f5900107e8a8e3b476ef2f Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Public Transit 002 Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource District Department of Transportation Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource December 1964 Subject The topic of the resource Buses Pedestrians Bus stops Description An account of the resource Passengers boarding the M4 DC Transit minibus. Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource Public domain Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource Photographs Language A language of the resource English Type The nature or genre of the resource Prints https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/13460/archive/files/efead4709ccab7ac90f5fffea8464142.jpg?Expires=1779321600&Signature=jU9KTO8WyGqqwX8Kmf4R62FEU%7El6wU-Z8ke3NJp9obrYlWRzDuEzZrtmB0AfMmHh3IeNTdWMnuv3VK6KeE1aUUBALqxig5JaUpmE3C03WRDdo%7EnSPKlMwWA-OdUaNWVa1c1hBkfpii4MwdjWLNNXZq3QZUE96tvHUwgRRYeGUPQoCCVXhEp4LiU4i-ROtOQVT6M-AdWLYCuMXZnSIU6wcjkq-Av9BDmLohVoUJ84QKbpZPr9W6rTIj8q38p2m3SndKz8HsD%7EPQKZs80WPekwF9GgfV9HxYpiCVBfCfYQxB-jgPmrR9KZoVZ%7Ex6%7EqpZ1QJDRSoLIrwP2wLgYOx9lgXw__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM 42caac6e24ad6459b00358dc718771ee Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Public Transit 001 Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource District Department of Transportation Subject The topic of the resource Buses Personnel Bus stops Women Description An account of the resource Metro and DDOT personnel pose in front of a Metro bus on the M-16 Mayfair River Terrace route that is accessible for people with disabilities. This is in front of the Wilson Building. L to R: Metro GM Carmen Turner, Metrobus head Leroy Bailey, at-large Councilmember and statehood activist Hilda Mason, and city administrator Carol Thompson (now Carol Thompson Cole). Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource Photographs Language A language of the resource English Type The nature or genre of the resource Prints Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1988 Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived The date and and part of the description information was crowdsourced from Old Time DC on Facebook. https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/13460/archive/files/7fd6a6ac1fd5702728be222320b45d62.jpg?Expires=1779321600&Signature=eJODQuN3YVnm8Qx5dsrsYhmkWhZoU%7EKpva-kGG5D0FIbECxkSm%7ERXZQpk31i%7ESQzp9-JGyGo3X-ISagkK3iTO8vjJVphaiMFb%7EQEDrUFjz%7EDP4dIfJMefY9S9sOtEtiUHBclI%7EivF7E85cXL9r1l4GxQzY5P6qapXBOWi87QaAHXUniyGbdulwhZbEGwSbdzp8DFAoDfTyxbP7JJZf2uPPsMwhT06AE45l4wYvZTRwAcbdtc3%7E4jBqfwnBgTZuM5YFT0lBnwkYmmt4JLeAZ1JD3IQlw7DaaQs7d8IhEV0W2BAFOtKUX9WqziefZtABBkBhwWOsTpQt1QiFsbwLODMg__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM 26145e9d17a847a269213e32d1f01d06 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Public Transit 005 Subject The topic of the resource Pennsylvania Avenue (Washington, D.C.) Streets Buses Motor vehicles Bus stops Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource District Department of Transportation Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource February 10, 1976 Description An account of the resource A Metro bus headed toward Union Station stopped at a bus stop in the 1500 block of Pennsylvania Avenue N.W. Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource Photographs Language A language of the resource English Type The nature or genre of the resource Prints https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/13460/archive/files/a8e558b89fe8551afbc2d632eccfa622.jpg?Expires=1779321600&Signature=Z%7EzRYI2cno8k8SFaCcB9PHraFdcDTI2uIVFDrk4i35oPh2jKBRiByqcL771-RcWVCOvmMMUBEMg28Tx08j8x0-COA2D3ibt7tSAD4bjbhrsJvuAUt2IO76EYU2fykxgJuBW8WUx2fdv7MbKUdpVkBTqA8fN1P7ylTvZuixmPLbi7O1bHOStDUNbmuDD7xS8K9HuiJZrPj14KQSxieFy90703HroZieJpVYzwigbHcT3zkDnrkc2s2TjZYfGV94zSmBk2MyXzE7yU27MGpXcPyx0joxp5TGc19A0T8jtBoxaYt5TEADWWKkQKTAnO4eRscJ0SPyqwfaaqLRUx-0UKag__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM 82d38fc6dc60f88b9f008054f08adf1a Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Public Transit 006 Subject The topic of the resource Streetcars Restaurants Passengers Children Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource District Department of Transportation Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1890 Description An account of the resource A streetcar on the 7th Street to Brightwood line. Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource Photographs Language A language of the resource English Type The nature or genre of the resource Prints https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/13460/archive/files/0ec90365e3a6db2bd926570edcf3f2ca.jpg?Expires=1779321600&Signature=jRa47AucIpAPJYDju7zbMPoWAgCDsSIoo5G6FoFjUIlznM0WYVudG4xGcgFUrPWh572HSu%7E2EN4B01-pyu8bqpuLpaLAJTRxKg1FqAc4HSqTWn9XqrQt56P7uCJ98SvWsThfza5QNID4l4p8IIZ4ijlaaTGLjV20m9ftNehLC49mKh9tIuDXM8Hvpwa1CqEpkn248Cdfbf6O0MjoahKr10LeIDIvA7BHqrjADYAMW%7E4ApN4PbrVz5gVxV9HQ7EvrLm9gvfTipAdzN3uDo09zaSuK5w9kIILx40G3P1cORcYHfwoz10oPe0olMrxQ%7EHhAveBANzH%7EFToCNNuQUx2D5Q__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM 940c593337ed04756815c1eace1ff7ab Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Public Transit 007 Subject The topic of the resource Passengers Passenger vehicles Tours Tourists Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource District Department of Transportation Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource circa 1890s Description An account of the resource A group of tourists riding the Touring Washington carriage next to a sign for Watertown Carriage Company. "Believe A. Livingston 5th row in front (above "touring")" Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource Photographs Language A language of the resource English Type The nature or genre of the resource Prints https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/13460/archive/files/c3719b50c59371539c60e6607c2dbe0d.jpg?Expires=1779321600&Signature=IfA%7EVo7vTAUu5N2GTS70MglDma8R60FNgAR8Du-Qrw3DcyYygKf3TZG8yp6IoHud916YHaT9aKM%7EhQXyIB4LHrFQNhG9Dxxyo8g0myGltcXokimVWkv2L208bCFu%7EFjbSeXmvbnREbowMHLkS-yOM3Vnp2YC9PCQWdLUkZV87rQodIsCP8gTbN6qKABM-qfi2wV0SLr4Kltw1sNV728Xb8OuLnO8RjKhQFZuemzRY48W4ohLnNm20K3KGDdP39fKI-vZgLbHVkkiSfm7xmUgrzmmQmdB5d2gymWeIL3%7EQM5%7EZFIeTlCuoo7Me9PqQkubXzJygsBQ4znyYNLgiNWL4Q__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM 6faa47c94100be12aa6b5e41419f6926 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Public Transit 008 Subject The topic of the resource Motor vehicles Trucks Streetcars Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource District Department of Transportation Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource Photographs Language A language of the resource English Description An account of the resource A man driving a delivery truck with streetcars behind him. Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource circa 1923 Type The nature or genre of the resource Prints https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/13460/archive/files/c243c031823a59252bd211667057b557.jpg?Expires=1779321600&Signature=pVm-Z97H1jXfW-qhm94uCmewbPGKg0BPWQRbe0-7i7xKsWnFKJkBSLajLDjlsbkJq9rbizWpEhYbolQGHBlvikFDxA2SKjb8m%7EPSbWybW%7EfldphhTeGk1-IskI-VLoJ35OZILhLMiKdP1BuOwNb4l1RRQTSj62RSvwFs448Kow-R4PyAgp2tAwuNd3zcT3g2pje-1Bc-w428JrWOkg3naXgVHqe2a7NP9XJwSMMjU9QzM7ZfNM0Vfa4l3%7EFcKX5phtYV1EwmnKOCIt4G1BqOZ1BNQwrpiyUMV02RqVzSiJTZixzmZC0pWdxRL-X4WxLJPSLsv%7E6xxcnhvoVuA2CunA__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM 2c6a2348ff9b51b5cc437eb2a5fd4759 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource 15th Street NW and Pennsylvania Avenue Subject The topic of the resource Streetcars Cable cars (Streetcars) Pennsylvania Avenue (Washington, D.C.) Treasury Building (Washington, D.C.) Parking Description An account of the resource View of a morning streetcar turning onto 15th Street NW at Pennsylvania Avenue NW in front of the Treasury Building. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource District Department of Transportation Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource Public domain Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource Photographs Language A language of the resource English Type The nature or genre of the resource Prints Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource DC Transit Subject The topic of the resource Cable cars (Streetcars) Buses Railroads Commuting Bicycling Description An account of the resource Photographs related to transit in the District of Columbia, including buses, streetcars, and Metro. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource District Department of Transportation Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource Various Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource Photographs Language A language of the resource English Type The nature or genre of the resource Prints Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource District Department of Transportation Still Image A static visual representation. Examples of still images are: paintings, drawings, graphic designs, plans and maps. Recommended best practice is to assign the type "text" to images of textual materials. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Public Transportation Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource District Department of Transportation Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource Photographs Language A language of the resource English Type The nature or genre of the resource Prints Subject The topic of the resource Motor vehicles Public transportation Buses Streetcars Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource Various Description An account of the resource Photographs of public transportation vehicles such as buses and streetcars in Washington, D.C. Bus Transit Buses Motor Vehicles Public Transit Streetcars