Sector Plan
Sector Plan
Staff Draft
Contents
Introduction 1
Highlights 2
Total Vehicle Miles Traveled
Intersections
Roadways
Pedestrians and Bicyclists
Ride On
Metrobus
Metrorail
Travel Trends 4
National, State, and Local Vehicle Miles Traveled 4
InterCounty Connector (MD 200) Effects on Local Roads 4
Congested Intersections 6
Most Congested Intersections by CLV 8
Other Congested Intersections 18
Intersection Exceeding Policy Area Congestion Standards 23
Congested Roadways 24
Non-Auto Travel Trends 38
Pedestrian and Bicycling Analysis 38
Transit Analysis 43
Ride On Bus
WMATA Metrobus
WMATA Metrorail
References 49
Maps
Map 1
Map 2
Map 3
Map 4
Map 5
Map 6
Map 7
Map 8
Map 9
Map 10
Map 11
25
Illustrations
Illustration 1
Illustration 2
Illustration 3
Illustration 4
Illustration 5
Illustration 6
Illustration 7
Illustration 8
Illustration 9
Illustration 10
Illustration 11
Illustration 12
Illustration 13
Illustration 14
Illustration 15
Illustration 16
Illustration 17
Illustration 18
Illustration 19
Tables
Table
Table
Table
Table
Table
Table
1
2
3
4
5
6
22
Introduction
Travel is a lifestyle decision that influences our investment of time and
money. Montgomery County is centrally located in the regions federal
and advanced technology marketplace, with 32,300 businesses
employing over 361,000 workers in the tech and federal sectors. The
Countys population has steadily increased from 833,363 in 2000
to just over 1 million in 2012. The County is also home to an active
agricultural reserve that contributes to the economy. The continuing
rise of population, jobs, and housing contributes to increased travel
and makes travel monitoring efforts important to gain a better
understanding of travel trends. To stay competitive, the County needs to
offer travel choices, making mobility affordable and accessible to all.
The Countys extensive road network serves a development pattern
reflecting a history of suburban growth. However, recent land use
planning efforts have shifted away from auto-oriented development.
Beginning with the down-County Central Business Districts (CBDs),
plans have focused development around Metrorail and selected
planned Purple Line stations. This has created thriving downtowns in
Bethesda and Silver Spring and will transform areas such as White Flint
and Wheaton.
Transit-oriented development is not only a County initiative, but is a key
element of Marylands Sustainable Growth Plan, which recognizes the
potential of high transit served areas to offer residents and employees
commuting options. To extend these options beyond Metrorail station
areas, WMATAs Metrobus and the Countys Ride On systems serve
suburban neighborhoods in the County.
The Planning Department has used INRIX travel-time tracking as a traffic monitoring resource over the past
two years, with the first results incorporated into the 2011 Mobility Assessment Report. At that time, the
monitoring effort was limited by available datasets. Since then, data for many more roadways has become
available. This report uses an expanded data set with the goal of enabling a year-to-year comparison of all
major roads in the County.
April 2014
The Departments transportation monitoring efforts will improve mobility analyses in the future with the increased
availability of non-auto travel data and advanced technology applications.
,, MD 200 has provided a travel time savings of 25% compared
HIGHLIGHTS
While this report analyzes congestion conditions on many more major
roadways than the 2011 Mobility Assessment Report, it finds that the
roadway travel conditions findings of the two reports are generally
comparable. This report maintains the original ranking system for
intersection Critical Lane Volumes (CLVs), as well as the system of
ranking intersections by the ratio of CLV relative to the applicable policy
area congestion standard. The 2012 Local Area Transportation Review/
Transportation Policy Area Review (LATR/TPAR) Guidelines now require
development proposals to include bicycle and pedestrian count data in
addition to vehicular counts. As a result, pedestrian and bike volumes
collected during the past year have increased considerably.
Uncongested - Light
0%-20%
Light - Moderate
21%-40%
Moderate - Heavy
41%-60%
Heavy - Severe
61%-80%
Roadways
,, Intercounty Connector (MD 200) vehicle traffic volumes
continue to grow at a steady rate of 3% per month.
April 2014
Severe
80%+
April 2014
Travel Trends
NATIONAL, STATE AND LOCAL VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED
VMT in Montgomery County in 2012 was 7.3 million miles, the lowest level since 2002 (7.2 million)
April 2014
vicinity of the ICC before and after the opening of this roadway to traffic
operations in November 2011. The intersections sampled were located along
New Hampshire Avenue, Norbeck Road, Layhill Road, Georgia Avenue and
Bonifant Road. At the nine intersections sampled, critical lane volumes have
dropped by 10 percent relative to pre-ICC conditions. The CLVs observed before
the opening of the ICC were sampled during the period 2008 to 2011. The
CLVs observed after the opening of the ICC were sampled in 2012. The three
intersections with the greatest CLV decrease are New Hampshire Avenue at
Norbeck Road, Norbeck Road at Layhill Road, and New Hampshire Avenue at
Randolph Road - ranging from a 17 to 14 percent drop in CLV between 2008
and 2012.
Table 1: Critical Lane Volumes (Pre ICC) 2008-2011
Selected Intersections
Current
Countdate
CLV
(Pre-ICC)
CLV
(Post-ICC)
% Change
5/8/2012
1053
875
-16.9%
5/1/2012
941
797
-15.3%
5/15/2012
1834
1580
-13.8%
10/1/2012
1530
1326
-13.3%
2/2/2012
1200
1050
-12.5%
2/14/2012
1464
1330
-9.2%
9/11/2012
1816
1656
-8.8%
2/16/2012
1237
1166
-5.7%
10/11/2012
1636
1678
2.6%
-10.3
Before
After
Savings
45
40
5 (11%)
23 (58%)
44
42
2 (5%)
25 (60%)
40
38
2 (5%)
21 (55%)
April 2014
Congested Intersections
To determine the Countys most congested intersections, vehicle
traffic count data are gathered at intersections to measure critical
lane volumes (CLVs). To determine the Countys most congested
travel corridors, observed travel time data are collected along these
routes and analyzed.
CLVs and observed vehicle traffic count data are included in the
Departments intersection database that covers 627 of the Countys
signalized intersections.
This report ranks the 627 signalized intersections in the database in
two ways:
1. Based on the CLV only.
2. Based on the degree to which the observed CLV at these
locations exceeds the applicable CLV policy area congestion
standard.
CLV provides a snapshot of intersection performance at a particular
time and place. This measure, consistent with previous mobility
reports, allows comparison with previous years. The discussion of the
CLV-based congestion analysis follows immediately below.
Even though the data sources are relatively constant, each year the
ranking changes as new information derived from development and
transportation projects becomes available. Most of these data (55
percent) comes from traffic engineering firms submitting studies for
development projects. The Maryland State Highway Administration is
the other significant source as well (41 percent). In addition, some
data come from traffic counts prepared for master plans. See the
Appendix for the full list of intersections and their associated critical
lane volume information.
April 2014
Name
Countdate
AM CLV
PM CLV
Policy Area
11/6/2013
1957
1612
5/19/2011
1234
1929
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
6/9/2009
1423
1923
3/12/2009
1061
1898
5/19/2010
1363
1853
11/6/2013
1684
1848
6/15/2011
1122
1816
1/4/2011
1464
1800
4/25/2012
5/24/2011
1536
1768
1795
1610
Congestion
Standard
Highest
CLV
V/C Ratio
1600
1957
1.22
1800
1929
1.07
1550
1923
1.24
1450
1898
1.31
1500
1853
1.23
1600
1848
1.03
1600
1816
1.14
1425
1800
1.26
1425
1500
1795
1768
1.26
1.18
Peak Level
of Service
FF
BF
BC
BF
CF
CF
BF
FF
FF
FF
April 2014
MOST CONGESTED INTERSECTIONS BY CLV (aerial photos do not reflect congested conditions)
The depiction of typical intersection performance is nearly impossible, since traffic conditions vary from day-to-day based on weather, vehicle incidents,
economic conditions, and construction that all directly impact traffic flow. Traffic counts at a particular location observed at different points in time may
yield higher or lower CLV results than previously reported because of these variable conditions.
One consistent way to show comparative performance at a given intersection is using the CLV measure. One limitation on ranking intersection
performance using this measure is that traffic counts at each intersection in the database are not updated every year due to the large number of
intersections. As a result, some of intersections with highly ranked CLVs use observed traffic counts collected during previous years. Given this limitation,
the following 10 intersections are ranked as the most congested.
Morning CLV: 1957
Illustration 4
Intersection 1
Rockville Pike at West Cedar Ln
In previous reports in 2011
and 2009, this intersection
has been ranked 4th and 2nd,
respectively. There are at-grade
intersection improvements that
are currently under construction
to help improve traffic flow at
this location.
April 2014
Illustration 5
Intersection 2
The White Flint Sector Plan, calls for public transportation additions and improvements to bus, Metrorail, and MARC
service to accommodate the areas planned increase in population and commercial development.
Evening CLV: 1929
April 2014
Illustration 6
Intersection 3
This intersection drops from number 1 in the 2011 report to number 3 in this report. The Countywide Transit Corridors
Functional Master Plan incorporates a transit corridor parallel to Democracy Blvd and along Democracy Blvd.
Evening CLV: 1923
10
April 2014
Illustration 7
Intersection 4
Based on available 2009 data, this intersections CLV makes it the third most congested in the County. The westbound through movement
on Darnestown Road appears to be the source of the evening congestion. This intersection is also the terminus of SHAs widening of MD 28
that was constructed several years ago. An eastbound lane was added to MD 28 as a part of the project. From Darnestown Road, through
movements share a lane with right turns onto Riffle Ford Road and as a result, traffic volume builds up. By comparison, the eastbound leg has
a separate through lane and a shared through lane, which support through movements during the morning peak. There are no other planned
improvements at this intersection at this time.
Evening CLV: 1898
April 2014
11
Illustration 8
Intersection 5
This intersection was ranked number 3 in the 2011 report, and drops to number 5 in this report. The existing CLV is based on observed
traffic count data from 2011 and has to not been updated to reflect more recent turning movement counts. This intersection is one
in a series of congested intersections along Shady Grove Road in the vicinity of Mid-county Highway. There are no other planned
improvements at this intersection at this time.
Evening CLV: 1853
12
April 2014
Illustration 9
Intersection 6
As noted in previous Mobility Assessment Reports, traffic congestion at this intersection is getting worse. In the 2011 report, this location
was ranked the 15th most congested; today it is ranked as the sixth most congested. As a down-County area, Connecticut Avenue in the
Bethesda-Chevy Chase Policy area consistently has one or more intersections ranked in the top 25 most congested. SHAs improvements
here were implemented several years ago. The future Purple Line transitway could alleviate congestion at this intersection.
Evening CLV: 1848
April 2014
13
Illustration 10
Intersection 7
Georgia Avenue at this location continues to be an increasingly congested commuter route for traffic heading in and out of the District
of Columbia. This intersection is a point through which vehicle traffic heads to destinations primarily in the north and in the eastern part
of the County and beyond during the evening peak period. This section of Georgia Avenue in the vicinity of this intersection shows high
congestion levels during morning and evening peak hours. This intersection is included in the Montgomery Hills Project Planning Study
and is recommended for reconstruction.
Evening CLV: 1816
14
April 2014
Illustration 11
Intersection 8
Observed congestion conditions at this location have varied during the past several years. In the 2008 Highway Mobility Report,
this intersection ranked 1st in congestion with a CLV of 2,179. In the 2009 Highway Mobility Report, the congestion ranking at this
location dropped to 29th with a CLV of 1,647 as a result of capacity improvements. In the 2011 Mobility Assessment Report, the
congestion ranking at this location moved up to 7th with a CLV of 1,800 a reflection of increasing congestion in the area.
Evening CLV: 1800
April 2014
15
Illustration 12
Intersection 9
Recently observed CLVs at this location have fluctuated, but appear to show a gradually increasing congestion trend, moving from
1,697 in 2009, to 1,533 in 2011, to 1,795 in 2012. This intersection is characterized by heavy morning and evening peak volumes
given its function as a major access point to I-270 in Gaithersburg. There are no planned improvements at this intersection at this time.
Evening CLV: 1795
16
April 2014
Illustration 13
Intersection 10
The previous count year for this intersection was in 2009 and exhibited a relatively low CLV, where it ranked low in both the 2011 and
2009 reports. The recently updated traffic count indicates a higher CLV value. As a result, the congestion ranking of this location has
moved upward to number 10 on the list. There are no planned improvements at this intersection at this time, but it is within the limits of
Rockvilles planned MD 355 reconstruction as well as the planned addition of BRT transit lanes.
Morning CLV: 1768
April 2014
17
18
Intersection Name
Count Date
AM CLV PM CLV
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
11/6/2013
1957
1612
5/19/2011
1234
1929
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
April 2014
Policy Area
Congestion
Highest CLV
Standard
V/C Ratio
Peak Level
of Service
1600
1800
1550
1450
1500
1600
1600
1425
1425
1500
1475
1957
1929
1923
1898
1853
1848
1816
1800
1795
1768
1742
1.22
1.07
1.24
1.31
1.23
1.03
1.14
1.26
1.26
1.18
1.18
1550
1500
1600
1475
1600
1500
1600
1600
1475
1600
1721
1718
1710
1704
1703
1692
1683
1680
1678
1672
1.11
1.15
1.07
1.15
1.06
1.12
1.05
1.05
1.14
1.05
CF
1550
1663
1.07
FB
6/9/2009
1423
1923
3/12/2009
1061
1898
5/19/2010
1363
1853
11/6/2013
1684
1848
6/15/2011
1122
1816
1/4/2011
1464
1800
4/25/2012
1536
1795
5/24/2011
1768
1610
3/24/2009
1742
1211
6/3/2010
1426
1721
6/6/2012
1422
1718
6/1/2011
1349
1710
2/11/2009
1704
1403
1/22/2009
1579
1703
3/5/2009
1692
1450
5/3/2012
1683
1679
1/21/2009
1228
1680
10/11/2012
1416
1678
2/29/2012
1490
1672
North Bethesda
Rockville City
Kensington - Wheaton
Derwood
Silver Spring - Takoma Park
Rockville City
Kensington - Wheaton
Silver Spring - Takoma Park
Fairland - White Oak
Bethesda - Chevy Chase
11/14/2006
1663
1232
North Bethesda
FF
BF
BC
BF
CF
CF
BF
FF
FF
FF
FC
CF
CF
FC
CF
FC
FC
BF
CF
CF
Intersection Name
Count Date
AM CLV PM CLV
Policy Area
Congestion
Highest CLV
Standard
V/C Ratio
Peak Level
of Service
23
3/12/2009
1660
1603
1600
1660
1.03
FC
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
9/16/2008
1384
1658
1656
1592
3/15/2011
1647
1486
1658
1656
1647
1645
1644
1636
1633
1628
1626
1624
1624
1610
1609
1609
1607
1604
1602
1601
1594
1591
1586
1580
1579
1579
1579
1574
1.10
1.22
1.18
1.02
1.11
1.15
1.14
1.01
1.01
1.01
1.02
1.07
1.09
1.09
1.08
1.03
1.12
1.03
1.10
0.99
1.03
1.07
1.09
0.98
0.99
0.98
CF
9/11/2012
1500
1475
1800
1600
1475
1425
1425
1600
1600
1600
1600
1500
1475
1475
1475
1550
1425
1550
1450
1600
1475
1475
1450
1600
1600
1600
50
1600
1571
0.98
4/1/2009
1594
1167
2/24/2004
1591
1358
10/18/2011
1586
1329
5/15/2012
1440
1580
4/27/2010
1579
1425
3/10/2009
1579
957
9/21/2011
1579
1530
3/5/2009
1087
1574
Rockville City
Aspen Hill
Shady Grove
Silver Spring - Takoma Park
Derwood
Germantown West
Montgomery Village - Airpark
Bethesda - Chevy Chase
Kensington - Wheaton
Silver Spring - Takoma Park
Silver Spring - Takoma Park
Rockville City
Aspen Hill
Aspen Hill
Fairland - White Oak
North Bethesda
Gaithersburg City
North Bethesda
Potomac
Bethesda - Chevy Chase
Aspen Hill
Fairland - White Oak
Olney
Bethesda - Chevy Chase
Bethesda - Chevy Chase
Bethesda - Chevy Chase
2/3/2009
1413
1571
2/26/2009
1604
1645
11/18/2010
1644
1323
6/2/2011
1636
1589
10/4/2007
1633
1170
11/6/2013
1415
1628
7/2/2008
1318
1626
3/6/2008
1508
1624
6/2/2011
1520
1624
4/25/2012
1610
1475
11/6/2008
1609
1467
1/9/2009
1609
1238
11/15/2006
1607
1575
9/13/2011
1604
1261
4/25/2012
1602
1547
2/11/2009
1601
1165
FF
CC
CF
FC
FF
FB
CF
CF
CF
CF
FC
FC
FC
FF
FC
FF
FB
FC
CC
FC
CF
FC
CA
CC
BC
CC
April 2014
19
Illustration 14
Intersection 18
This intersection is a major crossroads between Rockville and Wheaton and has experienced increasing congestion related to the
changing traffic patterns in the mid-County area. The completion of the ICC has noticeably changed mid-County traffic patterns, mostly
decreasing traffic congestion on east-west routes. Nonetheless, some congested locations, like this one, remain.
Morning CLV: 1683
20
April 2014
Illustration 15
Intersection 26
In the 2009 MAR, this intersection ranked 27th, and in the 2011 report it dropped out of the worst 100. The current 1,647 CLV at this
intersection is below the applicable policy area standard but this location is back as one of the Countys most congested intersections.
There are no other planned improvements at this intersection at this time.
Morning CLV: 1647
April 2014
21
Illustration 16
Intersection 40
The 2012 traffic count propelled this intersections ranking from below 100 to 40th. It is located in the Gaithersburg policy area and
three other intersections along Great Seneca Highway in the immediate vicinity of this intersection are similarly congested. Great
Seneca Highway in the vicinity of this location is a potential problem area that should be monitored. There are no other planned
improvements at this intersection at this time.
Morning CLV: 1602
22
April 2014
Another way of evaluating intersection performance using the CLV measure is to compare
the highest observed CLV (during the morning or evening peak period) relative to the
relevant Local Area Transportation Review policy area congestion standard. This
relationship is expressed in the form of a ratio between the observed CLV and the relevant
congestion standard. This measure can also be characterized as a volume- to-capacity
ratio (V/C ratio), where the V is the observed CLV and the C is the congestion
standard. If the V/C ratio is above one, then volume exceeds the capacity based on the
congestion standard for the policy area.
From a planning perspective, it is important to know which intersections exceed policy area
CLV congestion standards, and by how much. This information can help identify congestion
problems relative to standards and allows traffic mitigation measures to be prioritized in
master plans. Table 2 in the appendix lists the intersections by policy area that exceed the
applicable CLV congestion standard.
In the 2011 MAR, 17 percent of the
intersections in the database exceeded
the applicable policy area standard. As
of 2013, only 11 percent of intersections
exceed policy area standards, an overall
improvement. This is the lowest percentage
of intersections which exceeded the
applicable policy area congestion standards
since 2005. Most County intersections,
roughly 35 percent, fall within the 0.61
to 0.80 V/C ratio range. This reflects an
increase from 31 percent in the previous
MAR. Refer to Table 2 in the Appendix
to see this information reported for all
intersections in detail.
April 2014
23
Congested Roadways
Travel time corridor data is provided by the Regional Integrated
Transportation Information System (RITIS), which is an automated
data sharing, dissemination, and archiving system that includes many
travel time performance measures and analytics tools. Our purpose
in collecting, analyzing, and presenting travel time data is to inform
the broader audience such as the County Planning Board and County
Council to aid in future planning decision-making.
Although each corridor is unique, travel conditions among roadways
can be compared by measuring the travel time index (TTI), determined
from observed travel speed data.
New travel time data collected in support of this report expands the
previous analysis by including more roadwaysMD 27, MD 28,
MD 97, MD 117, MD 118, MD 119, MD 185, MD 193, MD 198,
MD 355, MD 390, MD 586, US 29, and US 650. Travel time data
was collected in all but one policy area for the roadways sampled.
In Potomac, travel time samples were unavailable during our data
collection process. Priority corridors, which include MD 355, MD 97,
MD 586, MD 198, and US 29, were evaluated in this report. These
are most traveled arterials in the County. In addition, other selected
roadways, located primarily in the northern portion of the County, were
evaluated as well.
The TTI is a comparison between the travel conditions during the peak period relative to free-flow conditions.
The index depicts how much longer, on average, travel times are during congested periods relative to
uncongested time periods.
In the 2011 MAR, TTI was calculated for each roadway sampled by
direction, spanning long distances through the County. One of the
drawbacks of this method of analysis was that the index represented
areas of varying densities and traffic variability, without reflecting those
variations.
To be more informative, the analysis should be performed based on the
limits of each policy area. A TTI analysis for major arterials by policy
area provides a more localized view of traffic congestion in a specific
planning area. In this report, the TTI line graph reports travel time
performance for arterial segments by policy area.
This report also provides a congestion percentage chart, measuring
the difference between uncongested traffic conditions (identified
with numerical value of 1.0) and the amount of congestion increase
over 1.0. That percentage increase over 1.0 is a time lost due to
congestion. Table 4 highlights the percentage of congestion based
on an average weekday, weekend morning peak periods and evening
peak periods. This table reports the average congestion percentage for
overnight and midday time periods, as well.
24
April 2014
0%-20%
Light - Moderate
21%-40%
Moderate - Heavy
41%-60%
Heavy - Severe
61%-80%
Severe
80%+
Colors indicate the severity of congestion ranging from 0%20% (uncongested to light), 21%-40% (light to moderate),
41%-60% (moderate to heavy), 61%-80% (heavy to severe),
and 81% + (severe).
April 2014
25
26
Ranking
Roadname
Bound
Policy Area
Congestion
Type
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
MD 355
MD 185
MD 97
US 29
US 650
MD 97
US 29
MD 355
MD 390
MD 355
MD 355
MD 193
US 29
MD 97
MD 586
MD 355
SB
SB
SB
SB
NB
NB
SB
SB
SB
NB
SB
WB
NB
SB
EB
SB
119%
112%
99%
96%
94%
93%
87%
80%
70%
69%
69%
68%
68%
65%
64%
63%
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
MD 355
MD 355
US 650
MD 28
MD 28
US 29
MD 28
MD 119
NB
SB
SB
WB
SB
NB
EB
NB
25
MD 119
NB
Shady Grove
Bethesda
Kensington Wheaton
Fairland White Oak
Silver Spring Takoma Park
Silver Spring Takoma Park
Kensington Wheaton
Bethesda
Silver Spring Takoma Park
Bethesda
Derwood
Silver Spring Takoma Park
Kensington Wheaton
Silver Spring Takoma Park
Kensington Wheaton
Rockville
Shady Grove
Clarksburg
Fairland White Oak
Aspen Hill
Rural East
Fairland White Oak
Aspen Hill
R&D Village
Gaithersburg
Severe
Severe
Severe
Severe
Severe
Severe
Severe
Heavy-Severe
Heavy-Severe
Heavy-Severe
Heavy-Severe
Heavy-Severe
Heavy-Severe
Heavy-Severe
Heavy-Severe
Heavy-Severe
Moderate-Heavy
Moderate-Heavy
Moderate-Heavy
Moderate-Heavy
Moderate-Heavy
Moderate-Heavy
Moderate-Heavy
Moderate-Heavy
Moderate-Heavy
April 2014
60%
59%
59%
58%
57%
57%
53%
53%
52%
0%-20%
21%-40%
41%-60%
61%-80%
80%+
6a
7a
8a
9a
10a-3p
4p
5p
6p
7p
8p-11p
Weekday (M-F)
0%
0%
0%
0%
1%
3%
25%
35%
27%
9%
1%
Weekend
0%
0%
0%
0%
3%
4%
4%
3%
4%
1%
0%
0%-20%
21%-40%
41%-60%
61%-80%
80%+
6a
7a
8a
9a
10a-3p
4p
5p
6p
7p
8p-11p
Weekday (M-F)
3%
41%
53%
50%
45%
42%
39%
51%
33%
16%
10%
Weekend
3%
34%
34%
34%
35%
30%
24%
25%
21%
20%
12%
April 2014
27
0%-20%
21%-40%
41%-60%
61%-80%
80%+
6a
7a
8a
9a
10a-3p
4p
5p
6p
7p
8p-11p
Weekday (M-F)
1%
18%
39%
38%
33%
30%
45%
53%
31%
21%
9%
Weekend
1%
10%
19%
19%
16%
18%
21%
14%
13%
13%
6%
0%-20%
21%-40%
41%-60%
61%-80%
80%+
28
April 2014
12a-5a
6a
7a
8a
9a
10a-3p
4p
5p
6p
7p
8p-11p
Weekday (M-F)
0%
8%
40%
58%
32%
20%
19%
21%
19%
12%
5%
Weekend
0%
2%
5%
7%
9%
14%
14%
13%
11%
8%
5%
0%-20%
21%-40%
41%-60%
61%-80%
80%+
6a
7a
8a
9a
10a-3p
4p
5p
6p
7p
8p-11p
Weekday (M-F)
2%
20%
43%
67%
55%
68%
45%
93%
62%
39%
13%
Weekend
1%
10%
20%
20%
21%
37%
21%
32%
25%
21%
10%
0%-20%
21%-40%
41%-60%
61%-80%
80%+
6a
7a
8a
9a
10a-3p
4p
5p
6p
7p
8p-11p
Weekday (M-F)
4%
22%
39%
49%
65%
40%
28%
33%
31%
23%
9%
Weekend
1%
13%
22%
22%
35%
25%
22%
21%
19%
18%
8%
April 2014
29
0%-20%
21%-40%
41%-60%
61%-80%
80%+
6a
7a
8a
9a
10a-3p
4p
5p
6p
7p
8p-11p
Weekday (M-F)
1%
15%
28%
27%
24%
21%
27%
31%
24%
18%
9%
Weekend
1%
7%
10%
10%
11%
13%
12%
12%
9%
10%
4%
0%-20%
21%-40%
41%-60%
61%-80%
80%+
30
April 2014
12a-5a
6a
7a
8a
9a
10a-3p
4p
5p
6p
7p
8p-11p
Weekday (M-F)
0%
13%
20%
23%
21%
22%
27%
27%
26%
19%
7%
Weekend
0%
5%
7%
7%
8%
13%
12%
12%
10%
9%
4%
0%-20%
21%-40%
41%-60%
61%-80%
80%+
6a
7a
8a
9a
10a-3p
4p
5p
6p
7p
8p-11p
Weekday (M-F)
1%
10%
13%
17%
20%
24%
23%
23%
26%
19%
8%
Weekend
1%
12%
14%
14%
19%
21%
17%
20%
20%
13%
6%
0%-20%
21%-40%
41%-60%
61%-80%
80%+
6a
7a
8a
9a
10a-3p
4p
5p
6p
7p
8p-11p
Weekday (M-F)
4%
22%
39%
49%
65%
40%
28%
33%
31%
23%
9%
Weekend
1%
13%
22%
22%
35%
25%
22%
21%
19%
18%
8%
April 2014
31
0%-20%
21%-40%
41%-60%
61%-80%
80%+
6a
7a
8a
9a
10a-3p
4p
5p
6p
7p
8p-11p
Weekday (M-F)
1%
12%
14%
21%
24%
37%
49%
52%
42%
26%
9%
Weekend
1%
9%
11%
11%
12%
19%
20%
19%
15%
10%
4%
0%-20%
21%-40%
41%-60%
61%-80%
80%+
32
April 2014
12a-5a
6a
7a
8a
9a
10a-3p
4p
5p
6p
7p
8p-11p
Weekday (M-F)
2%
26%
80%
112%
80%
40%
28%
22%
22%
16%
8%
Weekend
2%
16%
68%
68%
43%
33%
21%
19%
26%
21%
9%
0%-20%
21%-40%
41%-60%
61%-80%
80%+
6a
7a
8a
9a
10a-3p
4p
5p
6p
7p
8p-11p
Weekday (M-F)
1%
11%
18%
22%
22%
24%
36%
39%
36%
30%
8%
Weekend
1%
7%
14%
14%
13%
22%
26%
21%
21%
18%
6%
8p-11p
0%-20%
21%-40%
41%-60%
61%-80%
80%+
6a
7a
8a
9a
10a-3p
4p
5p
6p
7p
Weekday (M-F)
1%
35%
64%
68%
47%
49%
62%
68%
61%
40%
9%
Weekend
1%
16%
17%
17%
24%
41%
35%
31%
29%
29%
14%
April 2014
33
0%-20%
21%-40%
41%-60%
61%-80%
80%+
6a
7a
8a
9a
10a-3p
4p
5p
6p
7p
8p-11p
Weekday (M-F)
7%
29%
38%
44%
45%
41%
46%
47%
41%
32%
21%
Weekend
7%
24%
26%
29%
29%
31%
33%
27%
26%
24%
15%
0%-20%
21%-40%
41%-60%
61%-80%
80%+
34
April 2014
12a-5a
6a
7a
8a
9a
10a-3p
4p
5p
6p
7p
8p-11p
Weekday (M-F)
1%
32%
66%
70%
45%
21%
24%
26%
23%
18%
6%
Weekend
1%
5%
10%
10%
11%
16%
19%
17%
16%
13%
4%
0%-20%
21%-40%
41%-60%
61%-80%
80%+
6a
7a
8a
9a
10a-3p
4p
5p
6p
7p
8p-11p
Weekday (M-F)
48%
18%
74%
114%
119%
65%
61%
81%
87%
73%
60%
Weekend
51%
54%
61%
61%
61%
66%
63%
69%
44%
57%
56%
0%-20%
21%-40%
41%-60%
61%-80%
80%+
6a
7a
8a
9a
10a-3p
4p
5p
6p
7p
8p-11p
Weekday (M-F)
1%
16%
30%
43%
46%
69%
64%
61%
48%
33%
13%
Weekend
2%
7%
13%
13%
18%
26%
23%
23%
21%
19%
10%
April 2014
35
0%-20%
21%-40%
41%-60%
61%-80%
80%+
6a
7a
8a
9a
10a-3p
4p
5p
6p
7p
8p-11p
Weekday (M-F)
1%
22%
39%
41%
34%
33%
42%
38%
32%
23%
9%
Weekend
1%
10%
9%
15%
21%
21%
21%
16%
27%
18%
10%
0%-20%
21%-40%
41%-60%
61%-80%
80%+
36
April 2014
12a-5a
6a
7a
8a
9a
10a-3p
4p
5p
6p
7p
8p-11p
Weekday (M-F)
2%
28%
53%
64%
39%
37%
39%
42%
39%
28%
12%
Weekend
1%
8%
20%
20%
21%
23%
22%
19%
14%
17%
8%
0%-20%
21%-40%
41%-60%
61%-80%
80%+
6a
7a
8a
9a
10a-3p
4p
5p
6p
7p
8p-11p
Weekday (M-F)
4%
36%
87%
86%
55%
24%
22%
20%
19%
21%
9%
Weekend
1%
5%
17%
17%
17%
24%
20%
20%
27%
23%
12%
0%-20%
21%-40%
41%-60%
61%-80%
80%+
6a
7a
8a
9a
10a-3p
4p
5p
6p
7p
8p-11p
Weekday (M-F)
2%
34%
43%
43%
38%
48%
74%
94%
76%
50%
14%
Weekend
2%
14%
25%
25%
28%
36%
40%
40%
40%
37%
15%
April 2014
37
report. Outside the Urban Areas, there are 171 pedestrian counts
that have been collected. The amount of pedestrian counts is steadily
increasing with each Mobility Assessment Report, and consultant services
will be utilized to collect pedestrian and bike counts, when appropriate,
in support of master plan and sector plan updates. This effort will
substantially increase the amount of available non-motorized travel data.
Bike and pedestrian volume data are measured as an indication of the level of non-motorized travel through an
intersection. Bike turning movements inform the discussion of where and how cyclists are travelling. Pedestrian
flows are measured by the total volume traversing through an intersection at any given time of the day.
PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLING ANALYSIS
Both pedestrian and bike data are provided by traffic engineering
consultants in support of traffic impact study submittals from MDSHA and
MCDOT.
Currently, most pedestrian counts in the database are in the Urban Areas,
and along priority corridors and other major arterials. In the Urban Areas,
91 of the 172 signalized intersections have pedestrian counts, which
doubles the number of pedestrian data locations relative to the previous
38
April 2014
For the majority of the data set, pedestrian counts have been submitted
in a 13 hour format. Some peak hour numbers, which are in a 6 hour
format, have also been submitted into the database which covers the
peak but excludes non-peak. For the purposes of this report, the focus
is on peak periods only until there is a substantial amount of data that
includes both non-peak hours and peak hours.
Based on available pedestrian data, Downtown Bethesda has the most
pedestrian activity. Downtown Silver Spring and Downtown Wheaton also
exhibit high pedestrian volumes. The Countys highest daily pedestrian
April 2014
39
40
April 2014
April 2014
41
42
Bike
Ranking
Date
North Leg
South Leg
East Leg
West Leg
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
4/25/2012
12/12/2012
4/6/2011
4/6/2011
12/14/2010
4/6/2011
4/6/2011
11/17/2011
4/6/2011
1/18/2012
4/6/2011
11/17/2011
11/17/2011
1/18/2012
1/18/2012
5/9/2012
11/17/2011
1/29/2013
12/12/2012
9/14/2011
12/18/2012
5/3/2011
9/15/2011
5/11/2011
1/29/2013
9/15/2011
5/16/2012
9/5/2011
9/15/2011
12/18/2012
9/14/2011
5/11/2011
9/14/2011
5/11/2011
4/8/2012
9/13/2011
3/8/2012
2/6/2013
1/31/2012
1/31/2012
9/23/2010
5/23/2012
Woodmont Ave
Bradley Blvd
MD 187
MD 187
Woodmont Ave
MD 187
MD 187
Woodmont Ave
MD 187
Woodmont Ave
MD 187
Woodmont Ave
MD 355
St Elmo Ave
Woodmont Ave
MD 410
MD 355
Parklawn Dr
Tuckerman Ln
MD 586
Fenton St
Shady Grove Rd
MD 97
Omega Dr
Parklawn Dr
MD 97
Democracy Blvd
Newport Mill Rd
Grandview Ave
US 29
Valley View Ave
Site Access
East ave
Shady Grove Rd
Verizon Bldg Access
MD 586
Traville Gateway Dr
Democracy Blvd
MD 355
Snowden Farm Pkwy
MD 185
MD 27
Woodmont Ave
Bradley Blvd
MD 187
MD 187
Woodmont Ave
MD 187
MD 187
Woodmont Ave
MD 187
Woodmont Ave
MD 187
Woodmont Ave
MD 355
St Elmo Ave
Woodmont Ave
Newell St
MD 355
Parklawn Dr
Tuckerman Ln
MD 586
Fenton St
Shady Grove Rd
MD 97
Medical Ctr Dr
Parklawn Dr
MD 97
Democracy Blvd
Newport Mill Rd
Grandview Ave
US 29
Mall Access
n/a
Mall Access
Shady Grove Rd
Travilah Rd
MD 586
Traville Gateway Dr
Democracy Blvd
MD 355
Snowden Farm Pkwy
MD 185
MD 27
Montgomery Ln
Seven Locks Rd
NIH Driveway
Mckinley St
Bethesda Ave
Battery Ln
West Cedar Ln
Norfolk Ave
West Cedar Ln
Norfolk Ave
School Driveway
Cordell Ave
Chelthenham Dr
Norfolk Ave
MD 187
Newell St
Cordell Ave
Randloph Dr
Seven Locks Rd
MD 193
Bonifant St
Research Blvd
MD 193
MD 28
Wilkins Ave
Reedie Dr
Seven Locks Rd
MD 193
MD 193
Bonifant St
MD 193
Research Blvd
MD 193
Corporate Blvd
MD 28
Metrobus Access
Shady Grove Rd
Westlake Dr
Foreman Blvd
Foreman Blvd
Perry Ave
Brink Rd
Montgomery Ln
Seven Locks Rd
Lincoln St
Mckinley St
Bethesda Ave
Battery Ln
Oakmont Ave
Norfolk Ave
Oakmont Ave
Norfolk Ave
Huntington Pkwy
Cordell Ave
Norfolk Ave
Norfolk Ave
MD 187
Blair Mill Rd
n/a
Randloph Dr
Seven Locks Rd
MD 193
Bonifant St
Research Blvd
MD 193
MD 28
Wilkins Ave
Reedie Dr
Seven Locks Rd
MD 193
MD 193
Bonifant St
MD 193
Research Blvd
MD 193
Corporate Blvd
MD 28
Shopping Ctr Access
Shady Grove Rd
Westlake Dr
Clarksburg HS Access
Stringtown Rd
Perry Ave
Brink Rd
April 2014
Total
163
150
124
110
109
100
76
69
68
56
55
49
48
41
38
32
31
23
21
13
12
12
12
12
11
11
10
9
9
7
7
7
5
4
3
3
2
2
2
2
1
0
TRANSIT ANALYSIS
Transit performance measurements look at
headways and average ridership and are
provided by the Washington Metropolitan
Area Transportation Authority (WMATA),
and the Montgomery County Department of
Transportation (MCDOT).
Ride On Bus
Montgomery Countys Ride On bus service
is an extensive network of local, feeder,
circulator, and express routes that complement
the regional bus and rail service provided
by the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit
Authority (WMATA). Total Ride On boardings
on a typical weekday are similar to the total
number of passengers boarding Metrorail at
Metrorail stations.
In FY13, average weekday ridership on Ride
On routes reached 88,370, a slight increase
from the 87,990 riders in FY12. Ridership has
decreased from the 95,000 average weekday
boardings in FY08 due to service reductions
of about five percent during the past two
years. In addition, fare increases may have
contributed to the decline. The only bus line
that has been discontinued in 2013 is Route
94 between Kingsview and the Germantown
MARC station.
April 2014
43
44
April 2014
April 2014
45
46
April 2014
April 2014
47
WMATA Metrorail
Metrorail ridership by volume and time is measured at each of Montgomery Countys Red
Line stations.
In the County, Metrorail ridership volume decreased between February 2006 and February
2009. Average Weekday Ridership decreased between FY 11 (173,307) and FY 13
(170,255). The county has seen a slight decreasing trend of weekday ridership of metrorail
between FY 10 and FY 13. Between FY 11 and FY 13 there were roughly 3,000 less
riders on an average weekday. There was a 2.4% decrease in between FY 11 and FY 13
of average weekday ridership. Since the recession, the ridership recovery of rail ridership
has been behind Metrobus. Some causal explanations behind the slower recovery is the
expansion of Telework and Alternative Work Schedules (AWS) for federal government and
contract employees. 40% of all metrorail riders are federal employees.
Average weekday ridership is heaviest at the Silver Spring, Shady Grove, Bethesda, and
Friendship Heights stations. In July 2010, Shady Grove peaked at an average weekday
ridership of 30,952. Ridership at those stations has decreased since FY09. Summer months
are often the heaviest traveled, with ridership declining during the winter. Weather and
political events like the federal shutdown affect ridership volumes.
In Montgomery County, ridership patterns through the day reflect the predominantly
residential nature of areas surrounding many Metrorail stations. Monitoring of exits and
entries indicates that Metrorail stations in communities with a mix of jobs and housing tend
to have an even pattern of entries and exits throughout the day. For example, ridership at
the Friendship Heights station is relatively steady through the morning, midday, afternoon,
and evening. By contrast, nearly three quarters of all entries at the Shady Grove station,
which serves a high commuter population, occur in the morning hours and two thirds of
exits are in the evening hours.
Illustration 18: Metrorail Entries and Exits
48
April 2014
References
1. U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Adminstration, Office of Highway Policy Information, Traffic
Volume Trends, Washington, DC
2. Paper for the Journal of the Transportation Research Board, Identifying Net Effect of Highway Project in Before and
After Evaluation, August 1, 2013, Wenjing Pu, Subrat Mahapatra, Morteza Tadayon, Dennis Simpson
3. National Capital Region Transportation Planning Board, Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments,
Memorandum: INRIX Data Analysis for the Intercounty Connector (ICC) Before and After Study, Wenjing Pu
4. Washington Metropolitan Area Transportation Authority, 2012 and 2013 Metrobus and Metrorail Data
5. Montgomery County Department of Transportation, 2012 & 2013 Montgomery County Ride On Bus Data
6. I-95 Corridor Coalition, Vehicle Probe Project,
http://www.i95coalition.org/i95/Projects/ProjectDatabase/tabid/120/agentType/View/PropertyID/107/Default.aspx
7. Maryland State Highway Administration, 2012 Maryland State Highway Mobility Report, July 2012, Subrat Mahapatra
8. Maryland State Highway Administration, Purpose and Need Statement,
http://www.iccproject.com/PDFs/PurposeNeedStatement.pdf
9. Various Aerial Images. Imagery 2013. Research & Special Projects Division, Montgomery County Regional Office.
Maryland-National Capital Planning Commission.
April 2014
49
Appendices
Illustrations
Illustration 1
Illustration 2
Illustration 3
Illustration 4
Illustration 5
Illustration 6
Illustration 7
Illustration 8
Tables
Table 1 LATR Congestion Standards
Table 2 Intersections That Exceed the Policy Area Congestion Standard
Table 3 Top 50 Most Congested Intersections
Table 4 Comparison of County-wide 2010 and 2022 TRAVEL/3 Model Results
Table 5 Comparison of 2010 and 2012 TRAVEL/3 Model Results Non-freeway vs. Freeway Facilities
Table 6 2022 PM Peak Period V/C Ratios and Volumes
Table 7 Difference in PM Peak Period Volumes 2010 vs 2022
Table 8 Scheduled Road Construction Projects
Table 9 Intersection Ranking List by Report Year (Top 50)
Table 10 Countywide Intersection CLV Information
50
April 2014
Staff Draft
April 2014
Montgomery County Planning Department
M-NCPPC
MontgomeryPlanning.org