TOWN OF LA PLATATRANSPORTATION PLAN

PURPOSE & NEED

The purpose of this study was to collect and

analyze data on the Town’s street, bicycle

and pedestrian networks in order to perform

an evaluation of each systems needs, and

make recommendations for improving

safety, connectivity, and access to users.

Collect Existing Data

Analyze Current Trends

Study Horizon – 2030

INTRODUCTION &

BACKGROUND

The RBA Group (RBA) and the Charles

County Department of Planning and

Growth Management (PGM) have

performed this Transportation Study for

the Town of La Plata which includes:

more than 45 miles of roadway

7 signalized intersections

13 miles of pedestrian ways

Relationship to Town’s Plans

Vision Plan, 2000

Downtown Plan, 2001

Comprehensive Plan, 2002

Streetscape Concepts by MDOT and

SHA, 2003

Comprehensive Plan, 2009

Relationship to Town’s Plans

Improve the access and movement of traffic

within the Central Business District

Establish Route 6 connector to Rosewick

Road;

Expansion of the transportation grid system

to promote east-west movements;

Reroute the principal thoroughfares from the

Town’s core, in accord with the long-term

transportation network of the Vision Plan.

Common Themes:

Acquire and build the necessary infrastructure to provide mass transportation services to La Plata area residents and businesses, including the provision of train stations, bus stops, and park and ride lots, etc.

Make downtown La Plata a “pedestrian-friendly” place with adequate parking and alternative transportation opportunities.

Continue to establish a strong system of sidewalks and trails

INTRO: ROADWAYS

State roads, County roads, Town roads

Arterial roadways: Multi-lane roadways such

as: - US 301, Maryland (MD) 6, MD 488, MD

225, Rosewick Road

Collector roadways: Usually 2-lane roadways,

but carry substantial traffic, e.g. Washington

Avenue, St. Mary’s Ave, Radio Station Rd

Local roadways: La Grange Ave, Maple Ave,

Centennial Street, Kent Avenue

INTRO:

BIKE/PEDESTRIAN WAYS

Along State, County & Town Roads

Bike Lanes, Bike Paths or Trails

Concrete Sidewalks

Asphalt Paths

Roadway Shoulders

Dirt or “Buffalo Paths”

INTRO: TRANSIT

• Bus Transit

– MTA Commuter Bus (commuter transit)

– VanGo (local transit)

• Rail Transit

– Future Light Rail

EXISTING CONDITIONS:

ROADWAYS

• Good Arterial Routes

• Good basic framework

• Lack of Alternatives in certain areas

• Lack of connectivity

• Drainage Improvements needed on older

roads

• Shoulder improvements needed on older

roads

ROADWAYS

EXISTING ROAD NETWORK

REVIEW OF INTERSECTIONS

18 Intersections: Counted, Analyzed, Traffic

Projections made for the Year 2030

Signalized and Un-signalized Intersections

Charles Street at Washington Avenue Charles Street at Oak Avenue

FINDINGS: INTERSECTIONS

• Seven (7) signalized intersections

• Thirteen (13) signalized intersections

• Heavy left-turn volumes

• Inadequate turn lanes @ select intersections

• Traffic volumes greatly increase by 2030

• Intersection level-of-service degrades

• Planned network improves circulation

Signalized Intersections Reviewed

RECOMMENDATIONS:

INTERSECTIONS

UN-SIGNALIZED

INTERSECTIONS

13 Intersections Reviewed

4 Need improvement in short term (3 are State)

5 May need future improvements (all 5 are State)

4 Had no issues (2 are State)

Suggest Town utilize SHA resources to evaluate

traffic signal warrant studies.

SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS

Recommended intersection improvements:

5 of the 7 Intersections may need improvements

by 2030

3 Need improvement in short term

2 May need future improvements

SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS

Recommended Improvements (Examples):

US 301 at MD 6: 2007 – SB US 301 approaching need for double-left to MD 6

2030 - Double Left turn lanes needed in 3 of 4 approaches

US 301 at MD 225: 2007 - MD 225 Eastbound make thru/left turn lane

2030 – MD 225 EB will need a Double Left turn lane, plus MD 225 Westbound will need a right turn lane

MD 6 at Washington Avenue: Town should request that SHA explore relationship between this intersection and US 301 at MD 6 for signal timing, congestion relief

REVIEW OF ROADWAY

LINKS

• Mix of State, County & Town roads

• Multi-function roadways (local and thru trips)

• Mix of rural and suburban roadways

FINDINGS: ROADWAY LINKS

• Lack of connectivity

• Access control concerns

• Heavy traffic volumes projected to 2030

• Planned network improves circulation

RECOMMENDATIONS:

ROADWAY LINKS

ROADWAY LINKS

In General:

Additional Links needed to improve circulation

Improvement of existing roads (shoulders and

bypass lanes)

Ensure that Developments provide on-site and

off-site improvements to those roadways

affected by new traffic generated

ROADWAY LINKS (CONT’D)

Specific Examples:

Radio Station Road (Short)

La Plata Parkway (Short)

Quailwood Parkway South Extended (Short)

Heritage Green Parkway Extended (Short)

Caroline Drive Extended (Short)

MD 6 (Charles Street) Improvements (SHA) (Mid)

Jaybee Lane (Mid)

Quailwood Parkway North Extended (Long)

East Patuxent Drive Extended (Long)

Proposed Road Improvements

PEDESTRIAN & BICYCLE

SYSTEMS

Existing Conditions Analysis

Inventory and Needs

1. Town-wide Inventory and Needs Analysis – Excludes Interior Neighborhoods

• Inventory Database

Existing facilities

Missing linkages

• Existing Conditions Map

13 Miles of existing facilities

4.6 Miles of missing linkages

Pedestrian and Bicycle System

Inventory

Existing Conditions Map

2. Priority corridors received a higher level

of evaluation (Detailed Photo Inventory in

Appendix D)

St. Mary’s Avenue

Charles Street (MD 6)

Washington Avenue

Existing Conditions Analysis

Inventory and Needs (CONT’D)

Bike/Ped Review: St. Mary’s Ave.

South of Glen Albin Rd, looking south

North of Spanish Moss Dr, looking north

At Queen Victoria St, looking south

At the Green Turtle Restaurant, Looking north

Bike/Ped Review: St. Mary’s Ave.

South of Centennial St, looking north South of Centennial St, looking south

South of Frederick Dr, looking south At Glen Albin Rd, looking north

Bike/Ped Review: Charles St.

Charles St. at US 301, looking east

Charles St. at Washington Ave, looking west

Charles St. east of Willow La, looking west

Charles St. west of 301, looking east

Bike/Ped Review: Charles St.

Charles St. east of 7-11 store , looking west

Charles St. at Severn Dr, looking west

Charles St. at Maple Ave, looking east

Charles St. east of Patuxent Dr, looking west

Bike/Ped Review: Washington Ave.

Washington Ave at MTA Park & Ride Washington Ave south of Shining Willow Lane

Washington Ave at Washington Square Washington Ave at Talbot Street

Bike/Ped Review: Washington Ave.

Washington Ave south of Shining Willow Lane

Washington Ave, opposite Heritage Green Pkwy Washington Ave, opposite County Courthouse

Washington Ave, south of Hawthorne Drive

Pedestrian/Bicycle Findings

• Missing links along major corridors

• Linkages to remote neighborhoods

• Residential Neighborhood Access to

Downtown and Shopping Areas

• Potential Pedestrian Crossings

• Obstacles to Pedestrian and Bicycle

Access; ADA Upgrades in certain areas

• Bicycle Opportunities & Facilities

Improvement Identification, Analysis and

Recommendations

1. Improvement Project List

• Location,

• Limits

• Length

• Estimated Cost

• Priority

2. Existing & Planned Ped/Bicycle Systems Map

3. Phasing Priorities

• Short Range (2 – 4 year time frame)

• Mid Range (4 – 8 year time frame)

• Long Range (8 – 12 year time frame)

Sample: Improvement Project List

Existing and Planned Pedestrian & Bicycle

System Map

Implementation Options

Town Capital Improvement Projects

Cost Sharing among State, County and Town

Regulatory requirement for providing connectivity (large development projects)

Mandatory Cost Sharing for infill and redevelopment projects

Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance

Development Fee-in-lieu

Development Surcharges

Development Agreements

Design Considerations

Pedestrian Safety and Comfort

Bicycle Safety and Comfort

MDOT – 20 Year Bicycle and Pedestrian

Access Master Plan (Appendix A)

New Bicycle/Pedestrian Facility Guidelines

(Appendix B)

TRANSIT SERVICE

REVIEW OF TRANSIT

SERVICES - COMMUTERS

MTA Commuter Bus Routes (901 & 907)

Route 901 (38 Total Trips per day)

19 AM Trips to District of Columbia

19 PM Trips to La Plata Park & Ride

Route 907 (16 Total Trips per day)

8 AM Trips to District of Columbia

8 PM Trips to La Plata Park & Ride

REVIEW OF TRANSIT

SERVICES - LOCAL

VanGo Local Bus Routes (La Plata A & B)

La Plata Red A Route (27 Total Trips per day)

Service from 7:30 AM to 8:30 PM

Service to La Plata, CSM & Waldorf Transfer Point

La Plata Red B Route (27 Total Trips per day)

Circulator Service in La Plata

Serves Shopping Centers, Library, Senior Center,

Social Services, Community Centers

FINDINGS: TRANSIT

Existing Local Bus Services to Shopping & Medical Facilities

Commuter bus service currently adequate

Park and Ride currently adequate

Private Freight Rail line unlikely to serve commuters

Future Light Rail services would enhance commuter services

Preservation of 60’ right-of-way is required to allow needed width for two-way rail service adjacent to CSX Rail Line

RECOMMENDATIONS:

TRANSIT

RECOMMENDATIONS:

Work with new Commercial Developments

to provide VanGo stops/amenities

Continue to seek Park and Ride Sites for

Commuter Bus and/or future rail stops

Preserve the 60’ right-of-way for future

light rail corridor adjacent to CSX tracks

THE END