Author: Andrew Brown

STATEMENT on DC Department of Transportation’s New Visitor Parking Pass Program

Posted on by Andrew Brown

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
AUGUST 8, 2013
CONTACT: Cheryl Cort, (202) 251-7516 – cell

WASHINGTON, D.C. — The District Department of Transportation (DDOT) announced today that the Visitor Parking Pass (VPP) program will be available District wide to all Residential Parking Permit (RPP) eligible households and those in ANCs 1A, 1B and 1C. Click here to read DDOT’s announcement.

“Giving away something for free that is very valuable and in limited supply inevitably leads to conflict and frustration,” said Cheryl Cort, Policy Director for the Coalition for Smarter Growth. “DDOT’s plan to give out free visitor passes will increase demand for curbside parking in areas where it is already high. A better approach for high demand areas is to fairly price this valuable privilege so that residents, their guests and others would have parking available when they need it,” said Cort.

This decision demonstrates that DDOT needs to step up its efforts to completely reassess the Residential Parking Permit program. We call on DDOT to reset its residential parking management policies before making more individual decisions about public street parking privileges that don’t necessarily serve residents or the city well. A comprehensive approach includes tailoring to the needs and characteristics of different neighborhoods, and using pricing to efficiently manage valuable curbspace where it is scarce.

About the Coalition for Smarter Growth
The Coalition for Smarter Growth is the leading organization in the Washington D.C. region dedicated to making the case for smart growth. Its mission is to promote walkable, inclusive, and transit-oriented communities, and the land use and transportation policies needed to make those communities flourish. To learn more, visit the Coalition’s website at www.smartergrowth.net.

###

Most of new $1B transportation package for Montgomery is for Purple Line

Posted on by Andrew Brown

Montgomery County’s push for transportation investment paid a billion-dollar dividend Monday when the state committed money to eight county road, rail and bus priorities.

The lion’s share of funding — $680 million — will go to the Purple Line, a 16-mile light rail line planned to connect Bethesda and New Carrollton through Silver Spring. That includes $400 million for construction and $280 million already marked to buy land and finish the project’s design.

The state will seek a private company to run the light rail system.

Other projects, such as the Corridor Cities Transitway, Ride On Bus system and road improvements, will see smaller funding commitments from the state.

Standing above the Bethesda Metro station on Monday, Gov. Martin O’Malley announced the investments, saying they will bring needed jobs and traffic relief.

Led by County Executive Isiah Leggett (D), Montgomery pushed for an increase in the statewide gasoline tax in the 2013 legislative session. It sought a cash commitment from the state to the $2.2 billion Purple Line, as well as the Corridors Cities Transitway, a 15-mile bus rapid transit line connecting Clarksburg to the Shady Grove Metro station, estimated to cost $545 million.

Over the “last few decades,” Maryland stopped making necessary investments to build and maintain its transportation infrastructure, O’Malley (D) said Monday.

“The failure to act, the failure to make those better decisions, had a huge cost,” he said.

Time, jobs and the environment were sacrificed, he said.

Not everyone who heard the news on Monday was on board.

Opponents included about two dozen members of Friends of the Capital Crescent Trail, some of whom waved signs while others shouted slogans.

The western portion of the light rail is set to run along the Georgetown Branch section of the Capital Crescent Trail, from downtown Bethesda through the Columbia Country Club and across Connecticut Avenue.

“You couldn’t buy 20 acres inside the Beltway today to build a park. Why would you tear one down?” Ajay Bhatt, president of the group, asked in an email.

Running the Purple Line next to the trail, Bhatt said, would be “turning a serene tree-canopied nature trail through quiet neighborhoods enjoyed by thousands of young and old bikers, walkers and runners weekly into a shade-less ribbon of asphalt alongside twin sets of railroad tracks beneath high-power electrical lines with 250 daily trains passing at 45 mph.”

Deborah Vollmer of Chevy Chase said the rail line will lead to incalculable loss along the hiker-biker trail that, at points, parallels the Purple Line’s planned path. She said she is not opposed to mass transit, but the rail should be buried to avoid damaging the park-like atmosphere of the trail.

Another vocal opponent is Chevy Chase Councilman John Bickerman, who took issue with the announcement that the state would seek a private company to run the system.

“It’s an abomination, farming out this basic government service to the private sector,” Bickerman said. “It shouldn’t be contracted out. What if the revenues come in lower? What if the contractor doesn’t get the return that he’s expecting and the contractor goes belly up? Then what happens?”

Maryland lawmakers this spring passed the Transportation Infrastructure Investment Act — which raised taxes on gasoline and diesel — to bring $4.4 billion in new investment and 57,000 jobs in the next six years, officials said.

Flanked by dozens of state lawmakers, local leaders and members of the building trade, O’Malley said Montgomery’s share of that money will include the following:

• $400 million for construction of the Purple Line, which comes on top of $280 million announced previously to buy land and finish the project’s design.

• $125 million to construct a new interchange along Interstate 270 at Watkins Mill Road.

• $100 million to buy land and design the Corridor Cities Transitway.

• $85 million for Montgomery’s Ride On Bus system.

• $25 million to build and relocate a section of Md. 97 (Georgia Avenue) to bypass the center of Brookeville.

• $7 million to build interchanges at U.S. 29 and Musgrove Road and at U.S. 29 and Fairland Road.

• $3 million to design the widening of Md. 124 (Woodfield Road) from Midcounty Highway to south of Airpark Road.

• $3 million for planning to evaluate possible improvements in the Md. 28/Md. 198 corridor between Md. 97 and Interstate 95.

Lt. Gov. Anthony Brown shepherded a bill through the General Assembly this year that became the state’s new public-private partnership law. He said the state will deliver the Purple Line as its first and largest transit partnership with private industry. The state will seek a private company to build and operate the line.

“It’s a project that is going to connect our communities and grow our economy,” said Brown (D), who is running for governor in 2014, when O’Malley can’t run again because of term limits. “With the additional $400 million the governor just announced, we are showing how serious we are to delivering the Purple Line now.”

Montgomery looks to add 100,000 jobs through its efforts in the Great Seneca Science Corridor, Shady Grove, White Flint and White Oak, Leggett said.

“However, all of that depends on improvement in our transportation infrastructure,” Leggett (D) said. “Without that [investment], those jobs may come to a screeching halt.”

County leaders warned in December that without dedicated funding and clear state commitment to the project, the Purple Line, which is almost completely designed, would stall in its tracks.

“All of this is about better choices,” O’Malley said.

For transit advocates, the state commitment for the Purple Line was tempered by concerns over continued investment in highway projects.

Cheryl Cort, policy director of the Coalition for Smarter Growth, said investing in highway expansion projects only gives drivers temporary traffic relief and encourages more driving, not the transportation choices residents deserve.

Staff Writers Agnes Blum and Sylvia Carignan contributed to this report.

Click here to read the original story>>

State earmarks $1 billion in transportation money for Montgomery

Posted on by Andrew Brown

Montgomery County’s push for transportation investment paid a billion-dollar dividend Monday when the state committed money to eight county road, rail and bus priorities.

The lion’s share of funding, $680 million, will go to the Purple Line, a 16-mile light rail line planned to connect Bethesda and New Carrollton. Other projects, like the Corridor Cities Transitway, Ride On Bus system and road improvements, will see smaller cash commitments from the state.

Standing above the Bethesda Metro Station Monday, Gov. Martin O’Malley announced the investments, saying that they will bring needed jobs and traffic relief.

Led by County Executive Isiah Leggett (D), Montgomery pushed for an increase in the statewide gasoline tax in the 2013 legislative session. It sought a cash commitment from the state to the $2.2 billion Purple Line as well as the Corridors Cities Transitway — a 15-mile bus rapid transit line that will connect Clarksburg to the Shady Grove Metro Station, estimated to cost $545 million.

Over the “last few decades,” Maryland stopped making necessary investments to build and maintain its transportation infrastructure, O’Malley (D) said Monday.

“The failure to act, the failure to make those better decisions, had a huge cost,” he said.

Time, jobs and the environment were sacrificed, he said.

Maryland lawmakers passed the Transportation Infrastructure Investment Act this spring to bring $4.4 billion in new investment and 57,000 jobs in the next six years.

Flanked by dozens of state lawmakers, local leaders and members of the building trade, O’Malley said Montgomery’s cut of that money will include:

— $400 million for construction of the Purple Line, which comes on top of $280 million announced previously to buy land and finish the project’s design

— $125 million to construct a new interchange along I-270 at Watkins Mill Road

— $100 million to buy land and design the Corridor Cities Transitway

— $85 million for Montgomery’s Ride On Bus system

— $25 million to build relocate a section of Md. 97 (Georgia Avenue) to bypass the Town of Brookeville

— $7 million to build interchanges at U.S. 29 and Musgrove Road and at U.S. 29 and Fairland Road

— $3 million to design the widening of Md. 124 (Woodfield Road) from Midcounty Highway to south of Airpark Road

— $3 million for planning to evaluate possible improvements in the Md. 28/Md. 198 corridor between Md. 97 and I-95.

Lt. Gov. Anthony Brown, who shepherded a bill through the General Assembly this year that became the state’s new public-private partnership law, said the state will deliver the Purple Line as the state first and largest transit partnership with private industry. The state will seek a private company to build and operate the line.

“It’s a project that is going to connect our communities and grow our economy,” Brown (D) said. “With the additional $400 million the governor just announced, we are showing how serious we are to delivering the Purple line now.”

Montgomery looks to add 100,000 jobs through its efforts in the Great Seneca Science Corridor, Shady Grove, White Flint, and White Oak, Leggett said.

“However, all of that depends on improvement in our transportation infrastructure,” Leggett (D) said. “Without that [investment] those jobs may come to a screeching halt.”

Montgomery leaders warned last December that without dedicated funding and clear state commitment to the project, the almost completely designed Purple Line would stall in its tracks.

“All of this is about better choices,” O’Malley said.

But not everyone gathered on the Metro plaza supported the projects, namely the Purple Line.

Shouting “Bury the rail, save the trail,” opponents of the Purple Line frequently voiced their position over those who spoke.

Deborah Vollmer of Chevy Chase said the rail line will lead to incalculable loss along the Capital Crescent Trail, a hiker-biker trail that, at points, parallels the Purple Line’s planned path. Not opposed to mass transit, she said the rail should be buried to avoid impacting the park-like atmosphere of the trail.

Ajay Bhatt, president of Friends of the Capital Crescent Trail, said the announcement was bad news for the county’s green spaces.

“They talked a lot about development and a lot about growth in Maryland, but where are the parks going to come into play?” he said.

His organization is concerned that the Purple Line will take away the trail’s ambiance by placing parts of it next to the planned light rail.

After the announcement in Bethesda, Bhatt argued the Capital Crescent Trail is a valuable resource for downcounty residents.

“If you go on the Capital Crescent Trail between here and Georgia Avenue, it’s packed,” he said.

For transit advocates, the state commitment for the Purple Line was tempered by concerns over continued investment in highway projects.

Cheryl Cort, policy director of the Coalition for Smarter Growth, said investing in highway expansion projects only gives drivers temporary traffic relief and encourages more driving. It does not give resident the transportation choices they deserves, Cort said.

Click here to read the original story>>

Bi-County Parkway Means Traffic Solution or Fresh Mess

Posted on by Andrew Brown

outer beltway 3A new route through some of Prince William County’s rural north is pitched as pro-business and part of the area’s transportation solution, but critics have lined up to push back on a new run of pavement through a part of the region happy to be away from gridlock.

The Commonwealth Transportation Board recently approved a master-plan study for what’s become known as the “Bi-County Parkway,” a 10-mile road that would connect I-66 in Prince William County with Route 50 in Loudon County.

“This parkway would make people’s lives better,” said Bob Chase, president of the Northern Virginia Transportation Alliance. “It provides faster, safer transportation, and takes people off local roads.”

The road’s purpose is to ease the horrendous traffic that currently plagues the area, while also providing easier access to the Washington Dulles International Airport for residents of these counties. The Virginia Department of Transportation estimates that the road could carry nearly 42,000 vehicles a day by 2020 to combat the area’s exploding population.

“We see this as a vital north-south link for Prince William and Loudon,” Chase said. “It’s a common sense solution that makes employment centers accessible and takes traffic off existing roads.”

The parkway is also seen as an economic boon for the region.

“Not only will the road reduce traffic congestion between the counties, but it will also help the region connect with the airport,” said Leo Schefer, president of the Washington Airports Task Force. “The airport’s an economic engine for the area, and better access to it helps encourage businesses to locate nearby.”

The road also has the potential to benefit the airport itself by increasing the number of passengers and encouraging more cargo to pass through Dulles.

“It would allow for a better flow of passengers and information through the airport, and cargo is a part of that,” said Christopher Paolino, media relations manager for the Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority. “That would be a net positive for everyone, since as the airport grows, the region grows, and vice versa.”

But critics of the parkway are worried that road may harm the nearby Manassas Battlefield and Prince William’s Rural Crescent.

“This road could forever harm the landscape and the acres of historic sites it would cut through,” said Stewart Schwartz, executive director of the Coalition for Smarter Growth. “Residents have real concerns about the damage that this could cause to the community.”

Schwartz’s coalition has worked with other groups in developing a study finding that the parkway will only add traffic to the area, not ease it.

“If you build it, people will try to use it, and that creates congestion,” Schwartz said. “It’s also likely that this will bring pressure from developers to convert the Rural Crescent, and that will bring even more traffic.”

The group has also developed an alternative plan aimed at dispersing traffic by improving the interchange between Route 28 and I-66 and extending Metrorail service to Centreville, avoiding the need for the parkway.

“Our best hope is to improve our existing transit options and to build compact, walkable neighborhoods with public transportation,” Schwartz said.

Some local politicians echo the road rage, particularly Del. Tim Hugo (R-Centreville).

Transportation officials were trying to get the road done quietly, Hugo said. “But people woke up.”

The fight over the road has sent longtime political allies in Prince William County to opposing corners. Hugo argues support for the project is developer-driven.

“This is the wrong project at the wrong time, and the response from the people has been overwhelmingly in opposition,” Hugo said. “This road could create a commuter crisis from Fauquier to Fairfax.”

Proponents argue the goal is to get cars from one end of this rural area to the other, not increasing development within these communities. Shefer said the parkway can include easements around the road and limits on the number of exits to restrict development.

“If it’s designed the right way, then the parkway won’t harm the rural presence, but preserve it,” Schefer said.

Some changes have already been made to resolve some concerns about access and impacts on historical sites. As the project continues to take shape, Schefer and others are hopeful that the final product is controversy-free.

“The key is for everyone to work together, in order to help improve connectivity and save people time,” Schefer said. “There’s no reason this can’t be a win-win for everyone.”

Photo courtesy of VDOT.

Click here to read the original story>>

Advocates urge Gov. O’Malley to target funds to transportation projects supporting smart growth; Gov. O’Malley to announce transportation spending on Monday in Bethesda

Posted on by Andrew Brown

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Friday, August 2, 2013

Contact:

Kelly Blynn, Coalition for Smarter Growth, 202-675-0016 x 127

Ben Ross, Action Committee for Transit, 301-706-6826

Advocates urge Gov. O’Malley to target funds to transportation projects supporting smart growth

Gov. O’Malley to announce transportation spending on Monday in Bethesda

In advance of Governor O’Malley’s visit to Bethesda on Monday, several advocacy groups working in Prince George’s and Montgomery Counties released a letter Friday applauding funding pledged so far for transit, bicycling, and pedestrian infrastructure, while expressing concern over costly new highway capacity projects.

“All of our groups worked hard to build grassroots support for the transportation funding bill so we could have the ability to help realize Maryland’s smart growth and climate protection goals,” said Cheryl Cort, Policy Director at Coalition for Smarter Growth. “Now we’re concerned about how much of the money will go to projects that undermine those efforts.”

The concerns stem from the long list of costly highway capacity projects identified by each County as high priorities, and a state selection process that is done behind closed doors.  A few weeks ago, those fears were confirmed when O’Malley announced his list of projects for Prince George’s that included two major new road capacity projects for $250 million

“$150 million for an interchange at MD 4 and the Suitland Parkway is a massive public investment to support sprawling development,” said Karren Pope-Onwukwe, co-chair of Prince George’s Advocates for Community-based Transit. “This new interchange project will draw activity away from Metro stations and inside the Beltway communities, where we should be focusing development.”

In Montgomery, concerns center around four new road widening and interchange projects within the Route 28/198 corridor. These would cost half a billion dollars to duplicate the ICC, drawing away commuters and toll revenue.

“We have already wasted more than $2 billion on the ICC, which continues to be underutilized,” said Ethan Goffman of the Montgomery County Sierra Club. “Our investments should be in reducing carbon emissions and sprawl, not simply adding more and more capacity for cars.”

In addition, previous announcements indicate that Maryland may use a public-private partnership, effectively borrowing against future revenues, to help pay for Montgomery and Prince George’s top priority transportation project, the Purple Line.

“While we’re thrilled with the Purple Line’s continued progress, we’re concerned about the state’s desire to provide the local share of construction funding via a public-private partnership,” said Ben Ross, vice president of the Action Committee for Transit which has worked for the Purple Line for more than 25 years.  “We need the full $1.1 billion to open the line by 2020.  State funds that may be needed for that purpose should not be committed to lower-priority projects until we are certain that alternative financing is a good deal for taxpayers and riders.”

Advocates listed their top priorities for the suburban Washington region as building the Purple Line, funding the MARC Growth and Investment Plan, and funding Maryland’s share for WMATA’s reinvestment plan, Momentum. They also urged the state to expand investment in local road improvements to create new options for drivers, bicyclists, and pedestrians, such as a multimodal redesign of MD 355 (Rockville Pike) in the White Flint area.

Following on the heels of O’Malley’s announcement of his ambitious goals for addressing climate change last week, including doubling transit ridership, advocates hope his transportation announcements will remain consistent. “We want to see the Governor ensure that all transportation projects funded by the state support the excellent smart growth and climate goals his administration has set,” said Kelly Blynn, Coalition for Smarter Growth.

The transportation advocates’ letter can be found here and is signed by the Action Committee for Transit, Bike Maryland, Clean Water Action, Coalition for Smarter Growth, Prince George’s Advocates for Community-based Transit,  Montgomery County Sierra Club, Montgomery County Young Democrats, Montgomery Countryside Alliance, Prince George’s County Young Democrats, and the Washington Area Bicyclists Association (WABA).

About the Coalition for Smarter Growth

The Coalition for Smarter Growth is the leading organization in the Washington D.C. region dedicated to making the case for smart growth. Our mission is to promote walkable, inclusive, and transit-oriented communities, and the land use and transportation policies needed to make those communities flourish. To learn more, visit the Coalition’s website at www.smartergrowth.net.

###

Proposed D.C. Zoning Code Re-Write Sparks Debate

Posted on by Andrew Brown

zrrThe first major re-write of Washington’s zoning code since it was established in 1958 is expected to be submitted by the Office of Planning today, ending six years of work and triggering another lengthy public process before the District’s Zoning Commission, which will have the final say on new zoning policies.

Among the most controversial proposals is the effort to make D.C. less car-dependent by eliminating mandatory off-street parking space minimums in new development in downtown D.C. Planning Director Harriet Tregoning had also proposed to eliminate parking minimums in transit corridors, but recently changed her position to only reduce those minimums.

Tregoning’s change has left advocates on both sides of the debate unhappy.

“We’re encouraged that there’s not going to be an absolute rule that there will be no parking minimums. We think that’s a step in the right direction, but we are still very concerned because the planning director of the District of Columbia has shown her hand. She, for whatever reason, does not believe there is a parking issue throughout much of the District,” said AAA MidAtlantic spokesman Lon Anderson.

“We are disappointed the city has listened to the opposition to progressive reforms and is backing down on the important reform of removing parking minimums in areas that are well served by transit. The proposal would address a number of the biggest problems with parking minimums but we still maintain that parking minimums are not the right approach to building a more affordable, sustainable city,” said Cheryl Cort, the policy director for the Coalition for Smarter Growth.

At the heart of the controversy lies the question: how much parking does a growing, thriving city need as developers continue to erect new housing, office and retail space near Metro stations, in bus corridors, and downtown D.C. The alleged scarcity of parking spaces today is a common complaint of motorists, but those who favor dumping the parking minimums say residents and visitors will have adequate alternatives to automobile ownership, like car-sharing services, Metro rail and bus, and Capital Bikeshare.  Smart growth advocates also point out developers will still be able to build parking if the market demands it, but the decision will be left to them, not decided by a mandate.

“We’re building a lot of parking that generates a lot of traffic, undermining the best use of our transit system,” Cort said.

“We spent the last 100 years building our society to be automobile dependent and then to try to change that in a very short period of time is really imposing an awful lot in a region that is still very, very dependent on the automobile,” counters Anderson.

About 38 percent of all D.C. households are car-free, according to U.S. Census data.

Photo courtesy of AP Photo/Michael Dwyer. Copyright 2013 by WMAL.com. All rights reserved.

Click here to read the original story>>

Two sites remain in running for Prince George’s regional medical center

Posted on by Andrew Brown

Two sites remain in the running for a new, $645 million regional hospital in Prince George’s County to replace the financially ailing Prince George’s Hospital Center in Cheverly and create a full-service medical campus.

The board of Dimensions Healthcare System, which oversees county-owned medical facilities, voted unanimously Thursday to send letters to Maryland health officials endorsing Largo Town Center and the shuttered Landover Mall as possible locations for the hospital.

The move buys officials a little more time to negotiate with representatives of the sites. The board’s chairman, C. Philip Nichols Jr., said he expects a final decision by September.

Plans call for the 259-bed hospital to be part of a full-service medical complex and trauma center, offering high-end specialities and general care. There would be offices for private practices, a parking garage and possibly classrooms for medical professionals who also might train at nearby Prince George’s Community College in Largo. The hospital, expected to open in 2017 as part of the University of Maryland Medical System, would serve Prince George’s and Southern Maryland.

Officials hope the medical complex will attract paying patients with health insurance and provide more primary care to residents of the majority-minority county.

Studies show that Prince George’s residents suffer disproportionately from diabetes, heart disease and obesity, and there is a shortage of primary-care medical practices.

The Dimensions board acted on recommendations from a search committee whose members include representatives from the University of Maryland Medical System, Prince George’s County and the Maryland Department of Health and Mental Hygiene.

Before choosing Landover Mall and Largo Town Center, the search committee examined properties around the Morgan Boulevard Metro station and Woodmore Towne Center shopping center, said Bradford L. Seamon, a Dimensions board member, search committee member and top aide to County Executive Rushern L. Baker III (D). But the committee rejected those sites because of their locations and because they had multiple owners, making it difficult to assemble enough land.

The committee’s deliberations are not open to the public.

Now the search committee is looking into cost, availability, the potential for future development, and whether roads, sidewalks and other infrastructure would be needed, he said.

“We are still continuing to negotiate, and we want to negotiate with two sites to come up with the best deal. At this point, I don’t want to talk numbers,” Seamon told the board.

Although officials of the University of Maryland Medical System had urged the search committee to find at least 100 acres, Seamon said committee members now believe that the hospital itself could be built on four or five acres of a 25-acre medical campus.

The two sites in contention each have advantages, Seamon said. The Largo site, at the Boulevard at Capital Centre, is on 70 acres of county-owned land next to a Metro station and close to the Capital Beltway.

There is an additional 30 acres in adjacent parcels owned by two private developers.

The 88-acre Landover Mall site is nearly vacant — only a Sears store remains. It is close to the Capital Beltway and about 11 / 3 miles from the Largo Town Center Metro station. Landover Mall is owned by the Lerner family, which also owns the Washington Nationals baseball team.

Cheryl Cort of the Coalition for Smarter Growth is pushing for Largo Town Center but said Landover Mall is ripe for redevelopment.

“It is crying out for something to happen at the mall,” she said. “But something as important as the hospital should not be so far from transit.”

Douglas M. Duncan, the former Montgomery County executive who is representing the Lerners, declined to comment.

Eventually, the University of Maryland Medical System is expected to take over Dimensions Healthcare but will not bear any of the costs.

Plans call for a new company — New Dimensions — to float $450 million in bonds, with its $200 million debt service paid by the state. Separately, Prince George’s would float $200 million in bonds.

Click here to read the original story>>

Bi-County Parkway debate fueled by research from both sides

Posted on by Andrew Brown

One of our regular readers brought to our attention an issue that we haven’t been covering: Northern Virginia’s proposed Bi-County Parkway. The parkway would connect Prince William and Loudoun counties, but it has sparked an impassioned debate about our region’s growth trends.

outter beltwayOn the one side, the Coalition for Smarter Growth has done research that says that the parkway would create more sprawl, congestion, and traffic. CSG released the findings of a study on the subject last week and proposed a “common-sense, comprehensive alternative.” (CSG, 7/17)

On the other side, the 2030 Group – led by developer Bob Buchanan – commissioned a report from GMU’s Stephen Fuller which determined that our region’s continued growth will include a big increase in car use. The group is using this finding to support their push for the parkway. (WaPo, 7/21)

Here’s more context for the debate – the Washington Post’s coverage since September 2012. We’d love to hear your thoughts on the subject in the comment section. What are the pros and cons? (The good and the bad, not the professionals and convicts.)

Click here to read the original story>>

Testimony before the Hon. Andrea Harrison, Chair, Prince George’s County Council Re: Prince George’s CB 27-2013: Rental Conversion First Refusal

Posted on by Andrew Brown

Please accept these comments on behalf of the Coalition for Smarter Growth. Our organization works to ensure that transportation and development decisions in the Washington, D.C. region, including the Maryland suburbs, accommodate growth while revitalizing communities, providing more housing and travel choices, and conserving our natural and historic areas.

The Coalition for Smarter Growth would like to express its support for CB 27, with the amendment that “Sec. 13-1120. Designation” be deleted. We are concerned that this designation by resolution provision is unnecessary and inhibits the function of this tool. Overall, we support this bill as a careful tool to assist with the preservation of quality rental housing to better meet the needs of many Prince George’s residents who struggle to find decent housing they can afford.

It is a measured tool to allow the county to help preserve affordable rental housing either through direct purchase, or through assigning the right to a third party. It also allows for waivers if certain conditions are met. This approach offers the county the opportunity to protect affordable rental housing without unduly burdening the building owner. Thus this tool is likely to be used where there is institutional and community capacity to purchase and rehabilitate rental housing. We welcome this useful tool to help Prince George’s residents secure quality, affordable rental housing.

Like all Washington, D.C. area jurisdictions, a significant share of residents find housing costs too high for their incomes. Building a toolbox of policies that help more Prince George’s working families find suitable housing that they can afford is a critical task for public officials. CB 27 is one of the tools that the county should have to assist renters with the opportunity to preserve their homes as affordable. This should be one of many tools. In 2010, we published a policy paper examining Prince George’s housing needs and initiatives (summary attached). This effort followed extensive work we have done in other jurisdictions on affordable housing policy. Through our research, we found that Prince George’s uses few local policy tools, both in absolute terms and compared to surrounding jurisdictions (see attached Table 5). Thus we welcome CB 27 as an important contribution to a local housing toolbox we hope to grow over time.

Thank you for your consideration.

Cheryl Cort, Policy Director

Leesburg Council Passes Resolution Against Bi-County Parkway

Posted on by Andrew Brown

The Leesburg Town Council voted 5-2 Tuesday night to pass a resolution opposing the North-South Corridor and its components, despite firm requests – some have called them threats – from Loudoun Board of Supervisors Chairman Scott K. York and Loudoun Chamber President Tony Howard not to do so.

The resolution opposes construction of the Bi-County Parkway (formerly the Tri-County Parkway until shifted west several years back), which is a component related to the North-South Corridor aimed at improving connectivity between Prince William County and Dulles International Airport and the surrounding area. The corridor itself actually refers to an area, not a specific road; however, the construction of the Bi-County Parkway would complete a new direct four-lane path from I-95 in Prince William County to Route 50 in Loudoun. In its entirely, it would link I-95 all the way to Route 7. All segments of that connection are planned for at least four lanes of traffic, with few interchanges and plenty of traffic lights.outer beltway 2

The Loudoun Chamber and Board of Supervisors as well as the state have put their support behind project, but a majority of the Leesburg Town Council believes the road would spark denser development in Loudoun’s Transition Policy Area and dump traffic on Route 7 that would overflow onto town streets.

“The problem I have with the North-South corridor is that … as with Prince William County, they’re concerned about protecting the Rural Crescent; in Loudoun we’re concerned about protecting the low-density transition area,” said Mayor Kristen Umstattd.

Umstattd and at least one other councilmember also pointed out that Interstates 95 and 81 were only four lanes in sections.

“I don’t want to see another I-95 or Interstate 81 coming up from 95 and dumping onto Route 7,” Umstattd said.

The Chamber’s Howard called that point “a completely misunderstood representation of what this project is proposed to be.”

Howard said the four-lane road, which would have traffic signal primarily instead of interchanges, would in no way resemble those interstates.

“I’m very disappointed in the vote,” Howard said. “The actions they took yesterday weren’t necessary. It’s not reasonable that Leesburg will see any increase in traffic, because the Bi-County Parkway is 15 miles away.”

Councilmember Marty Martinez said the council could not look only at the Bi-County portion of the corridor because the roads will all connect, and drivers will find them.

“They’re all going to connect eventually,” he said. “It is going to impact Leesburg and I have to be concerned about that.”

Councilwoman Kelly Burk said the chamber was putting business interests over those of residents.

“Economic development gets higher consideration than anything else – the environment, the community,” she said.

The council’s resolution included a list of projects it would prefer to see funded instead of the Bi-County Parkway, which the council requests undergo further environmental study.

Council members Kevin Wright and Tom Dunn voted against the resolution.

Opponents of the road held a conference call last week to offer an alternative plan that they said would keep 45,000 vehicles off of Loudoun’s roads. While those vehicles trips, the group acknowledged, would still exist somewhere in the region, they would have fewer impacts on the Manassas National Battlefield Park.

“The Bi-County Parkway makes conditions worse and doesn’t address some important needs,” said Stewart Schwartz, of the Coalition for Smarter Growth, one member of the group of opponents.

Opponents of the road have also argued that it primarily serves business needs, but forecasts show commuters would be the primary users, using the road to escape other congested routes. That would lengthen routes for commuters and prove a minimal benefit and other users crowd the new route, according to opponents.

Fin the full report with executive summary and appendices here.

The group offering the alternative vision for the parkway includes the Southern Environmental Law Center, the Coalition for Smarter Growth, the Piedmont Environmental Council, the National Trust for Historic Preservation, the National Parks Conservation Association.

Virginia Sec. of Transportation Sean Connaughton, who is the former chairman of the Prince William County Board of Supervisors, previously presented his case for the road in an editorial letter; read the letter here.

Howard said the disagreement would not harm the relationship between the town and chamber.

“We’re still friends,” he said. “The chamber’s going to continue to advocate for the town’s projects.”

The council’s resolution included a list of favored projects, including interchanges at the Route 15 Bypass and Edwards Road, Battlefield Parkway and Route 7 and Battlefield and the Leesburg Bypass. In addition, the resolution urges support for construction of Crosstrail Boulevard between Route 7 and Sycolin Road.

Photo courtesy of VDOT.

Click here to read the original story>>