Montgomery County Life Sciences Center. LOOP TRAIL GSSC Implementation Advisory Committee Meeting #2 March 26, 2015

Transcription

1 Montgomery County Life Sciences Center LOOP TRAIL GSSC Implementation Advisory Committee Meeting #2 March 26, 2015

2 Trail Alternatives GENERAL ASSUMPTIONS Where separated bicycle and pedestrian facilities exist, the bike facilities will be located closest to the street, and pedestrian facilities will be located closest to buildings. Proposed trees will be located just inside the curb and will provide a buffer between the trail and the street. ALTERNATIVE 1: SHARED USE PATH ALTERNATIVE 2: DIVIDED BIKE PATH AND SIDEWALK Pros: Accommodates both bikes and pedestrians Minimizes the need to utilize private property or move the curb Does not require substantial re-grading and construction of retaining walls Cons: Does not achieve the Master Plan/Design Guidelines vision of separated bicycle and pedestrian facilities accompanied by on-road bike facility Pros: Achieves Master Plan/Design Guidelines vision of providing separated bicycle and pedestrian facilities Provides a safer and more comfortable experience for both bicyclists and pedestrians Cons: Requires either utilizing some adjacent private property or moving the curb to implement in most locations Will require some re-grading and construction of retaining walls Not conducive to higher speed bicycle travel (10-12 mph) unless accompanied by on-road bike facility Lack of buffer between bicycle and pedestrian facilities ALTERNATIVE 1B: SHARED USE PATH WITH ON-ROAD BICYCLE FACILITY ALTERNATIVE 3: DIVIDED BIKE PATH AND SIDEWALK WITH BUFFER Pros: Minimizes the need to utilize private property Does not require substantial re-grading and construction of retaining walls Provides a safer and more comfortable experience for both bicyclists and pedestrians Conducive to higher speed bicycle travel (10-12 mph) speed bicycle travel in separated facility min. Pros: Achieves Master Plan/Design Guidelines vision of providing separated bicycle and pedestrian facilities Provides maximum safety and comfort for bicycles and pedestrians by separating and buffering bicycle and pedestrian facilities Greatest potential for placemaking features and amenities Cons: Requires the most additional space through either utilizing private property or moving the curb Cons: Differs from the Master Plan/Design Guidelines vision of separated two-way bicycle and pedestrian facilities Requires the most intensive re-grading and construction of retaining walls May require moving curbs and shifting lane widths to accommodate protected bike facility LSC Loop Trail: GSSC IAC Meeting #2 March 26,

3 Trail Alternatives ALT 1: SHARED USE PATH (MINIMUM LOOP TRAIL WIDTH) PROS: Accommodates both bikes and pedestrians Minimizes the need to utilize private property or move the curb Does not require substantial re-grading and construction of retaining walls CONS: Does not achieve the Master Plan/Design Guidelines vision of separated bicycle and pedestrian facilities accompanied by on-road bike facility Tree Panel Shared Use Path Not conducive to higher speed bicycle travel (10-12 mph) unless accompanied by on-road bike facility Indianapolis Cultural Trail, Indianapolis, IN Potomac Yard Park, Alexandria, VA Carrollton, TX LSC Loop Trail: GSSC IAC Meeting #2 March 26,

4 Trail Alternatives ALT 1B: SHARED USE PATH WITH ON-ROAD BICYCLE FACILITY (ONE-WAY PAIRS) PROS: Minimizes the need to utilize private property VARIATIONS: Does not require substantial re-grading and construction of retaining walls Provides a safer and more comfortable experience for both bicyclists and pedestrians pedestrians No grade separation at sidewalk level Conducive to higher speed bicycle travel (10-12 mph) in separated facility CONS: Tree Panel One-Way Cycle Track Shared Use Path Differs from the Master Plan/Design Guidelines vision of separated two-way bicycle and pedestrian facilities May require moving curbs and shifting lane widths to accommodate protected bike facility No grade separation at street level Netherlands Missoula, MT Chicago, IL LSC Loop Trail: GSSC IAC Meeting #2 March 26,

5 Trail Alternatives ALT 2: DIVIDED BIKE PATH & SIDEWALK PROS: Achieves Master Plan/Design Guidelines vision of providing separated bicycle and pedestrian facilities VARIATIONS: Provides a safer and more comfortable experience for both bicyclists and pedestrians pedestrians CONS: Paving Strip Divider Requires either utilizing some adjacent private property or moving the curb to implement in most locations Tree Panel Two-Way Bike Path Sidewalk Will require some re-grading and construction of retaining walls Lack of buffer between bicycle and pedestrian facilities Curb/Grade Separation Vancouver, BC Netherlands Philadelphia, PA LSC Loop Trail: GSSC IAC Meeting #2 March 26,

6 Trail Alternatives ALT 3: DIVIDED BIKE PATH & SIDEWALK WITH BUFFER (MAXIMUM LOOP TRAIL WIDTH) PROS: Achieves Master Plan/Design Guidelines vision of providing separated bicycle and pedestrian facilities VARIATIONS: Provides maximum safety and comfort for bicycles and pedestrians by separating and buffering bicycle and pedestrian facilities Greatest potential for placemaking features and amenities CONS: Requires the most additional space through either utilizing private property or moving the curb Plantings in Buffer Tree Panel Two-Way Bike Path min. Buffer Sidewalk Requires the most intensive re-grading and construction of retaining walls Furnishings in Buffer Indianapolis Cultural Trail, Indianapolis, IN Indianapolis Cultural Trail, Indianapolis, IN Green Trail, Silver Spring, MD LSC Loop Trail: GSSC IAC Meeting #2 March 26,

7 Loop Segments DECOVERLY DRIVE (North of diamondback drive) OMEGA DRIVE (Northern Segment) DECOVERLY DRIVE (South of diamondback drive) OMEGA DRIVE (Southern Segment) TO BELWARD FARM BELWARD CAMPUS DRIVE MEDICAL CENTER DRIVE JOHNS HOPKINS DRIVE PSTA PROPERTY: NEW ROAD TO TRAVILLE PARK TO FALLSGROVE PARK Scale: 1 =300 LSC Loop Trail: GSSC IAC Meeting #2 March 26,

8 OMEGA DRIVE (NORTHERN SEGMENT) Existing Conditions WIDTH EXISTING CONDITIONS 12 & Constraints Existing sidewalk edge ALT ALT ALT LSC Loop Trail: GSSC IAC Meeting #2 March 26,

9 OMEGA DRIVE (SOUTHERN SEGMENT) Existing Conditions WIDTH EXISTING CONDITIONS 12 & Constraints Existing sidewalk edge ALT OR ALT ALT LSC Loop Trail: GSSC IAC Meeting #2 March 26,

10 OMEGA DRIVE: CONSTRAINTS LSC Loop Trail: GSSC IAC Meeting #2 March 26,

11 MEDICAL CENTER DRIVE: TREES PRESERVED Existing Conditions WIDTH EXISTING CONDITIONS 14 & Constraints Existing sidewalk edge ALT ALT ALT LSC Loop Trail: GSSC IAC Meeting #2 March 26,

12 MEDICAL CENTER DRIVE: TREES REMOVED Existing Conditions WIDTH EXISTING CONDITIONS 14 & Constraints Existing sidewalk edge ALT ALT ALT LSC Loop Trail: GSSC IAC Meeting #2 March 26,

13 MEDICAL CENTER DRIVE: CONSTRAINTS Drainage areas and entry walls create pinch points that may require reduced loop trail width LSC Loop Trail: GSSC IAC Meeting #2 March 26,

14 PSTA PROPERTY: NEW ROAD Existing Conditions Edge of 150 ROW (w/on-road bike facility) WIDTH ALT 1 18 & Constraints ALT 3A Edge of 150 ROW (w/out on-road bike facility) ALT 3B Edge of 150 ROW (w/out on-road bike facility) STREET CROSS SECTION (150 ROW PER MASTER PLAN) Sidewalk Space (25 ) Travel Lanes Transitway Travel Lanes Sidewalk Space (25 ) LSC Loop Trail: GSSC IAC Meeting #2 March 26,

15 JOHNS HOPKINS DRIVE Existing Conditions WIDTH EXISTING CONDITIONS 13 & Constraints ALT 1 (per CCT 15% plans) 14 CCT-proposed sidewalk edge ALT ALT LSC Loop Trail: GSSC IAC Meeting #2 March 26,

16 BELWARD CAMPUS DRIVE Existing Conditions WIDTH EXISTING CONDITIONS 14 & Constraints Existing sidewalk edge ALT ALT ALT LSC Loop Trail: GSSC IAC Meeting #2 March 26,

17 BELWARD CAMPUS DRIVE TO DECOVERLY DRIVE A Decoverly Drive Missing roadway connection (per GSSC Master Plan) between Belward Campus Drive and Great Seneca Highway/Decoverly Drive leaves a gap in the loop trail Continuation of loop trail is constrained by existing topography and vegetation Johns Hopkins Drive Belward Campus Drive Great Seneca Highway Key West Avenue No existing crossing at Great Seneca Highway B Option A: Loop Continuation per Master Plan Decoverly Drive Great Seneca Highway Decoverly Drive Great Seneca Highway PROS: Achieves Master Plan loop trail alignment Provides direct connection between Belward Campus Drive and Decoverly Drive CONS: existing vegetation May require encroachment into forest conservation easement Forest Conservation Easement Forest Conservation Easement No existing crossing at Great Seneca Highway (would need to be coordinated with SHA) < 5% slope with switchbacks Option B: Alternate or Interim Route Existing Conditions: Key West Avenue (L) and Great Seneca Highway (R) PROS: removal of existing vegetation Does not require new crossing at Great Seneca Highway CONS: Creates dead end at Belward Campus Drive Does not achieve Master Plan loop trail alignment support shared use LSC Loop Trail: GSSC IAC Meeting #2 March 26,

18 DECOVERLY DRIVE (SOUTH OF DIAMONDBACK DRIVE) Existing Conditions WIDTH EXISTING CONDITIONS 16 & Constraints Existing sidewalk edge ALT ALT ALT LSC Loop Trail: GSSC IAC Meeting #2 March 26,

19 DECOVERLY DRIVE (NORTH OF DIAMONDBACK DRIVE) Existing Conditions WIDTH EXISTING CONDITIONS & Constraints ALT 1 (per CCT 15% plans) 15 CCT-proposed sidewalk edge ALT ALT LSC Loop Trail: GSSC IAC Meeting #2 March 26,