Arlington Public Schools Thomas Jefferson Site Evaluation Transportation, Circulation, and Parking Review

Transcription

1 Arlington Public Schools Thomas Jefferson Site Evaluation Transportation, Circulation, and Parking Review Thomas Jefferson Working Group Meeting #8 December 15, TJWG Meeting, December 15, 2015

2 14 Building Level Planning Committee Meetings September 2013 Schematic Design Multiple June 2014 Public Meetings/ Gallery Walks Conceptual Phase February 2014 Final Design 8 Public Facilities Review Committee Meeting 1 Joint County Board/School Board Work Sessions 2

3 ACCESS OPTIONS FOR SCHEMES 2 AND 3, PARKING 3 TJWG Meeting, December 15, 2015

4 Thomas Jefferson site Parent drop off/pick up School bus 18 Oct 2014 EXISTING CONDITIONS Thomas Jefferson Middle School + Community Center

5 Thomas Jefferson site Parent drop off/pick up School bus 20 Nov 2014 PROPOSED SCHEME 2 New 725 seat ES at Thomas Jefferson

6 Thomas Jefferson site Parent drop off/pick up School bus 20 Nov 2014 PROPOSED SCHEME 3 New 725 seat ES at Thomas Jefferson

7 Can accommodate separate pick up/drop off for parents and buses; for elementary and middle schools Can divide pick up/drop off traffic between S. Old Glebe Road and 2 nd Street S 7

8 Existing 363 spaces are suitable for new Elementary School and at capacity Middle School Up to 30 more spaces needed for expanded Middle School Must locate, manage, and sign parking so it is convenient to on site venues (maximize sharing) Consider needs of all users (e.g., theatre patrons, community center users, field users, etc.) 8

9 Working Group Discussion 9

10 ADJACENT STREET TRANSPORTATION 10

11 Congestion on S Old Glebe Road during arrival and dismissal (e.g., buses passing and vehicular queuing) Congestion and safety concerns at S Old Glebe and 2 nd Street S intersection Congestion at S Glebe Road and 2 nd Street S intersection General problem of managing changing roadway and sidewalk widths along 2 nd Street S (especially between S Old Glebe and Fillmore and at 2 nd and Irving) 11

12 Arrival (8:00 a.m. 9:00 a.m.) Dismissal (3:30 p.m. 4:30 p.m.) Based on observed TJMS traffic patterns, assuming neighborhood elementary school 12

13 Existing Middle School & Proposed Elementary School Traffic Pattern Combined Trips Projected Neighborhood Elementary School Trips 7:00 AM 7:05 AM 7:10 AM 7:15 AM 7:20 AM 7:25 AM 7:30 AM 7:35 AM 7:40 AM 7:45 AM 7:50 AM 7:55 AM 8:00 AM 8:05 AM 8:10 AM 8:15 AM 8:20 AM 8:25 AM 8:30 AM 8:35 AM 8:40 AM 8:45 AM 8:50 AM 8:55 AM 9:00 AM 9:05 AM 9:10 AM 13 1 hour 10 min between bell times Existing Middle School Trips Volumes

14 Existing Middle School & Proposed Elementary School Traffic Pattern Combined Trips Existing Middle School Trips 45 min between bell times Projected Neighborhood Elementary School Trips 7:00 AM 7:05 AM 7:10 AM 7:15 AM 7:20 AM 7:25 AM 7:30 AM 7:35 AM 7:40 AM 7:45 AM 7:50 AM 7:55 AM 8:00 AM 8:05 AM 8:10 AM 8:15 AM 8:20 AM 8:25 AM 8:30 AM 8:35 AM 8:40 AM 8:45 AM 8:50 AM 8:55 AM 9:00 AM 9:05 AM 9:10 AM Volumes 14

15 S Glebe Rd 2nd Street S Bell Times Volumes 7:00 AM 7:15 AM 7:30 AM 7:45 AM 8:00 AM 8:15 AM 8:30 AM 8:45 AM 9:00 AM 9:15 AM 15

16 Choice: Countywide Walk Bike School bus Personal Vehicle Carpool Transit Other Choice: Area 3 6% 1% 67 77% 19 26% 0% 0% 0% Similar Neighborhood schools Thomas Jefferson Middle School 7 13% Based on 2013 APS GO! Parent Surveys % 54 62% 18 38% 0 2% 0 1% 0 1% 16 37% 1 5% 29 57% 23 38% 0 1% 0% 0% 33% 9% 34% 20% 1% 1% 0%

17 Arrival Dismissal 17

18 Arrival Dismissal 18

19 19

20 Signs and markings Curb extensions Corner radii reduction Raised intersection/crossing Improved sight lines Curb ramp improvements Improved accessibility (ADA) Intersection control Improved bus operations 20

21 Impact of new school to surrounding streets decreases moving further from new school New school trip volumes would be similar to existing middle school, but would happen at a later time Personal vehicle mode split is similar for Area and Neighborhood schools, lower for Countywide 21

22 Future transportation concerns parallel existing concerns Walking and bicycling networks are generally good, with some exceptions Potential for mitigation BLPC and PFRC processes evaluate mitigation options Programmatic and enforcement strategies are part of the solution 22

23 Working Group Discussion 23

24 BROADER TRANSPORTATION CONTEXT 24 TJWG Meeting, December 15, 2015

25 Capacity Comparison Career Center * 1,600 Jefferson MS 982 Henry ES 463 Long Branch ES 533 Proposed TJ ES 725 Total 4,303 *Proposed capacity increase in future planning models 25 Capacity Comparison Yorktown HS* 2,200 Williamsburg MS 997 Discovery ES 630 Nottingham ES 513 Total 4,340

26 Operational Physical Improvements 26

27 Traffic signal timing On Street parking regulations Turn lane designation School Zone speed reductions Signage and markings Enforcement & education 27

28 Curb extensions and other crosswalk enhancements Street corridor rebuilds New traffic signals or beacons Sidewalk and trail construction or reconstruction Refuge island and medians ADA access enhancements 28

29 Traffic patterns related to a school are diluted the farther away from the school Arlington has a commitment to provide seats for all students and transportation to school, thus there are going to be school related trips 29

30 Working Group Discussion 30 TJWG