Category: Maryland

Planners approve transportation priorities for D.C. region

People who represent the fragmented jurisdictions across the D.C. region agreed Wednesday on a set of priorities for transportation planners.

The plan adopted unanimously by the Transportation Planning Board urges local governments to think regionally in selecting projects, emphasize ones that fix the road and transit network we already have, strengthen public confidence in their decisions and give people more options about how to travel.

The Regional Transportation Priorities Plan attempts to shape planners’ thinking in choosing projects, but it doesn’t name any projects to advance. The lack of specificity frustrates some transportation advocates, including Bob Chase, the president of the Northern Virginia Transportation Alliance. He refers to it as an Alice’s Restaurant “You can get anything you want” approach to planning.

Supporters, including Stewart Schwartz of the Coalition for Smarter Growth, see progress in the fact that a planning panel is willing to set regional priorities. Virginia, the District and Maryland have their separate systems for selecting and advancing projects. They are more responsive to local interests than to regional needs. While Schwartz has criticized aspects of the plan, he has supported its emphasis on fixing things first, and on improving the efficiency of the existing road and rail network.

The priorities plan doesn’t affect the underlying structure of local planning. but the formal regional support for its goals could influence upcoming decisions. The power of the Transportation Planning Board lies in the legal need for the jurisdictions to incorporate their projects in the region’s Constrained Long-Range Transportation Plan.

The priorities plan now becomes a policy guide for local and state leaders who want to get their projects into the regional long-range plan. Local travelers naturally remain more focused on how they’re going to get home tonight rather than on what the transportation network will look like in a decade or two. But as they back up on the Beltway or squeeze aboard crowded Metro trains, many do wonder if there is any connection between their plight and the planning process.

The plan approved Wednesday is one of those rare documents dedicated to the lateRonald F. Kirby, who as director of transportation planning for the board, guided the development of the document. The dedication says in part: “This plan, which Ron worked tirelessly to develop, is a reflection of his innovative yet pragmatic approach to improving the region’s transportation system and making the region a better place.”

The plan’s priorities are grouped into three areas.

Meet existing obligations. Maintain the region’s existing transportation system. For example: Fix Metro and maintain it in a state of good repair.

Strengthen public confidence and ensure fairness. Pursue greater accountability, efficiency and access to transportation for everyone.

Move more people, more efficiently. Make strategic decisions to lessen crowding and congestion on the region’s roadways and transit system to accommodate growth.

Use this link to see the Regional Transportation Priorities Plan.

Todd Turner, a Bowie city council member and chairman of the priority plan task force, said the existence of such a plan, underpinned by a survey that sought public opinion on these priorities, will help restore public confidence in transportation planning. “But people have to take leadership in their own communities,” he said. In effect, addressing his local government colleagues across the region, he added: “We’re giving you the guidance. It’s up to you to do it.”

Read the original article at Washington Post >>

Photo Credit: Gerald Marineau

Testimony Re: Southern Green Line Station Area Sector Plan and Endorsed Sectional Map Amendment

Testimony Re: Southern Green Line Station Area Sector Plan and Endorsed Sectional Map Amendment

Regrettably, the Coalition for Smarter Growth expresses its opposition to the proposed amendments to the Adopted Southern Green Line Station Area Sector Plan and Endorsed Sectional Map Amendment. While we have testified in support of many helpful bills and resolutions that advance the County’s efforts to attract high quality investments around its Metro stations, we regret that this proposed overlay, while well-intentioned, is likely to do more harm than good …

Plans for express bus system in the works for eastern Montgomery County

Plans are in the works for bus rapid transit along U.S. 29, but officials say it will be at least five years before construction begins.

About 50 people attended a Coalition for Smarter Growth meeting on Nov. 13 at the White Oak Community Recreation Center to learn about the plans for U.S. 29, which are part of a larger plan to improve accessibility and mobility throughout the county. At the meeting, the group updated residents about the county’s current transit corridors functional master plan.

“It definitely doesn’t happen overnight,” said Larry Cole, transportation planner for the Montgomery County Department of Planning.

Cole said major construction on U.S. 29 won’t begin before important steps are taken, such as public outreach, and enough study in each location where the 60-foot-long buses will run.

The plan is to have public transportation with fewer stops and with its own lane in the highway.

Ten corridors, dedicated express highway lanes that serve to minimize travel time and move more people, are included at the rapid transit corridor map.

A Burtonsville station would serve as terminal for U.S. 29, with bus routes from Burtonsville to the Washington, D.C., line and 11 stations along the way among them: Burtonsville’s Park and Ride; Briggs Chaney’s Park and Ride; White Oak Transit Center; U.S. 29 and Fairland Road; U.S. 29 and Tech Road; Lockwood Drive and Oak Leaf Drive; Route 29 and Hillwood Drive; U.S. 29 and MD 193; U.S 29 and Franklin Street; U.S. 29 and Fenton Street and the Silver Spring Transit Center.

The station in Burtonsville would be at Briggs Chaney Road within walking distance from the Eastern Regional Service Center. “The important thing is that the master plan organizes and sees how all these [stops] work together,” Cole said.

According to Chuck Lattuca, manager for the Rapid Transit System Development, officials are studying the layout of highways, corridor lanes, number of stations, and where each station will be in the corridor.

Lattuca said the costs are still unknown, but the rapid transit will “definitely be a lot less expensive than light rail.”

Out of 81 miles dedicated to buses from the proposed rapid transit system, 70 percent will be in dedicated lanes and “the rest will be in some kind of mix traffic,” Lattuca said.

Mark Winston, a member of the Rapid Transit Task Force, said a lot of work needs to be done before construction begins.

“This functional plan is just the beginning. … This is a project that will benefit the community … as people learn more about this they become more comfortable,” Winston said.

According to Cole, it is important that the community understand the timeline of the bus rapid transit project. He said there will be future opportunities for residents to express their concerns and opinions.

“From our perspective as an organization, U.S. 29 should be a top priority in implementing the county’s bus rapid transit plan. The corridor has some of the highest density tracts in the county, [and] has some of the highest concentrations of poverty,” Kelly Blynn of the Coalition for Smarter Growth wrote in an email to The Gazette.

The Montgomery County Council will meet and possibly vote on the proposed Bus Rapid Transit project on Nov. 26.

Click here to read the original story.

BRT Advocates Urge Council to Make Friendship Heights Connection

The Coalition for Smarter Growth says the County Council needs to extend a bus rapid transit route planned for Wisconsin Avenue south to Friendship Heights.

The proposal took a big hit on Friday, when the Planning Department, which included the BRT line all the way to the D.C. line in its master plan, reversed course and agreed with Council staff that it should stop at a planned Bethesda Metro entrance on Elm Street.

The three-member Transportation Committee was split, producing a 1-1-1 vote for keeping the section of BRT to Friendship Heights, getting rid of it entirely and drawing it as a dotted line to indicate the county would study it if and when D.C. looked at transit of its own for Wisconsin Avenue.

The Coalition, a D.C. based nonprofit advocating for bus rapid transit, put out a press release on Monday urging the full Council to reconsider:

Stopping the route at Bethesda, instead of connecting it an additional 1.5 miles to the D.C. border could shortchange the area and the county in several ways, supporters said.

“With traffic congestion rising and the possibility of local Metro stations shut down for extensive repairs, residents in our area are seeking more options for getting north to Bethesda and beyond, or to Friendship Heights and D.C.” said Chevy Chase resident Ronit Dancis. “BRT would be a great new option for our neighborhoods.”

Residents in the Chevy Chase West neighborhood are opposed to BRT south of Bradley Lane because of safety issues and because they think it would make it more difficult to turn in and out of the neighborhood. Council staff analyst Glenn Orlin dismissed those fears, but said he was against extending BRT into Chevy Chase because he didn’t see who would use it.

The Coalition for Smarter Growth’s release cites developers JBG and the Chevy Chase Land Company as supporters of extending BRT south. Both developers have properties in downtown Bethesda and Friendship Heights. Other supporters include the Friendship Heights Transportation Management District Advisory Committee, the Bethesda-Chevy Chase Chamber of Commerce and Ward 3 Vision, a partner group of the Coalition for Smarter Growth that operates in D.C.

“Cutting short this key route would sever an important transit connection between Montgomery County and D.C., putting more cars on the road and make both Bethesda and Friendship Heights less competitive locations for business,” the Coalition of Smarter Growth’s Kelly Blynn said in the release. “Extending the route has few downsides. The plan proposes wider sidewalks and an improved pedestrian environment, while recommending no changes to the median or street width.

“Connecting the Montgomery Rapid Transit to Friendship Heights will enhance transit connections with D.C and its extensive bus network and the city’s own growing express network. The BRT link on 355 between Bethesda and Friendship Heights is a critical connection that needs to be made,” Blynn said.

The Transportation Committee will host two more worksessions on BRT on Tuesday.

Click here to read the full story. 

RELEASE: Make the Connection: Bethesda-Chevy Chase Businesses and Residents Call for Montgomery Rapid Transit to Extend to Friendship Heights, D.C. Border

Bethesda-Chevy Chase area residents and businesses today called for Montgomery County officials to ensure that the rapid transit line proposed for 355 connects Friendship Heights’ jobs and homes to the rest of the county. Stopping the route at Bethesda, instead of connecting it an additional 1.5 miles to the D.C. border could shortchange the area and the county in several ways, supporters said. “With traffic congestion rising and the possibility of local Metro stations shut down for extensive repairs, residents in our area are seeking more options for getting north to Bethesda and beyond, or to Friendship Heights and D.C.” said Chevy Chase resident Ronit Dancis. “BRT would be a great new option for our neighborhoods.”

Maryland DOT letter to Virginia rejecting Potomac Bridge Crossings

Dear Secretary Connaughton: Thank you for the opportunity to clarify our position on the proposed study of the Potomac Crossings for Virginia, Maryland, and the District of Columbia. Based on the draft press release you shared with my office, it appears you may have misconstrued former Secretary Swaim-Stanley’s letter regarding our position on new crossings of the Potomac River.

Montgomery County Debates Bus-Only Traffic Lanes For New Transit Network

Montgomery County lawmakers are considering plans for an 80-mile express bus network that is raising a divisive issue: how many car lanes should be turned into bus-only lanes?

About 80 percent of the lanes in the proposed bus rapid transit—or BRT—network would be new lanes, adding capacity to the existing corridors. About 20 percent would be “repurposed.” That’s the technical term for changing a lane now used by all traffic into “bus-only.” And AAA-MidAtlantic is asking Montgomery County to scrap that plan.

“The last thing we need to be doing is taking capacity away from traffic,” says AAA spokesman Lon Anderson. He says studies show “repurposing” lanes for buses makes traffic worse, and he calls the BRT plan lawmakers are now considering a recipe for gridlock.

Supporters say Anderson is cherry-picking his studies. Kelly Blynn at the Coalition for Smarter Growth—a major proponent of the BRT plan—says many studies have shown taking away lanes from cars actually reduces congestion.

The planning department actually hasn’t looked at each corridor yet to determine how things will change precisely because they are still at this 30,000-foot planning level. But when they ran their modeling with this proposed network, overall traffic congestion went down and traffic speeds went up.

How many lanes to “repurpose” is one of the most controversial aspects on the county’s plan, along with the potential cost and effectiveness.

Anderson says a study by the Institute for Transportation and Development Policy found only two corridors in Montgomery County currently have enough population density to support BRT.

“Those two corridors are Route 355 and I-270. ITDP indicated the other proposed routes in the county did not have sufficient density to make it work. Therefore, if you don’t have enough people to ride it, you’ll be spending a lot of money and taking lanes away from general purpose traffic, and you will wind up with worse traffic.”

The Coalition’s Blynn says projected job and population growth will provide plenty of future BRT riders.

“A lot of the places around the United States that have successful BRT systems have very similar densities to Montgomery County. Already a lot of the bus lines in the county have higher ridership than some of the successful BRT lines in places like Cleveland and Eugene, Oregon,” she says.

The ITDP study is great in many ways, but it didn’t do any modeling into the future. It looked at current bus ridership. It did not forecast out what things will look like in 2040, which the Montgomery County planning department has done.”

Click here to read the original story.

Bus Rapid Transit Supporters Fire Back At AAA Mid-Atlantic

A group of bus rapid transit supporters say AAA Mid-Atlantic’s opposition to bus-only lanes is rooted in a “fatally flawed,” traffic-solving approach of building more roads and more lanes.

Next Generation of Transit, a project of the Coalition for Smarter Growth, on Thursday issued a response to AAA Mid-Atlantic’s testimony from Monday.

The Coalition is lobbying for the Planning Board’sCountywide Transit Corridors Functional Master Plan, which establishes the framework for a 10-corridor, 81-mile bus rapid transit network in the county. The plan is now in front of the County Council’s Transportation Committee.

In May, AAA spokesperson Lon Anderson said proponents’ claims that drivers would flock to bus rapid transit, “makes one wonder if they’re smoking something funny.” AAA is against dedicated bus rapid transit lanes where it would mean the loss of a regular mixed traffic lane.

Next Generation of Transit said dedicated lanes will mean a better chance to solve traffic issues at a cheaper cost than building new lanes and roads. The group also said AAA Mid-Atlantic “misused and took out of context,” a report from an outside consultant that concluded Rockville Pike/Wisconsin Avenue was the only road in Montgomery that could support a gold standard bus rapid transit system:

AAA’s approach of continuing to solve our traffic problems by building ever more and wider roads is fatally flawed.  Solving our traffic challenges means focusing on moving people, not just cars, and that means using our existing infrastructure most efficiently.  By making it attractive to walk, bicycle, and take a high quality bus rapid transit service, we can provide more choices and make the transportation system work better for everyone – especially those who need to or choose to use a car.

Dedicating travel lanes to transit will provide a better chance for our road network to function more effectively – and will do so at far less cost to our communities than the other major option – increasing the size of our major arterial roads. Many jurisdictions that have dedicated roadspace to transit or bicyclists have seen no impact or even an improvement in traffic.  Even LA has dedicated lanes to buses this year on their congested Wilshire Boulevard, knowing that the only way forward is to focus on providing options to move people, not just cars.

The bus rapid transit proposal before the County Council right now is a great opportunity for Montgomery County to provide new transportation choices along major roads like Rockville Pike where new construction is bringing thousands of new residents. Experts like the Institute for Transportation and Development Policy (whose report AAA misused and took out of context) say that the 355 corridor, in addition to US29, Veirs Mill, and Georgia Avenue are all good candidates to start upgrades to transit service to achieve a BRT network.  Montgomery’s own planning department who conducted much more detailed modeling indicates a similar prioritization of corridors.

To solve our transportation challenges, we must look to the future, not an auto-oriented past.  That’s why a diverse coalition of over 36 business, civic, environmental, and social justice organizations have come together to call for a future that includes a robust bus rapid transit network for Montgomery County.

The Council’s Transportation Committee will hold a worksession on the proposed east county BRT corridors on Monday morning.

Click here to read the original story.

VDOT Takes Heat For Big PR Bill In Support Of Bi-County Parkway

The Virginia Department of Transportation agreed to pay the D.C.-based public relations firm Stratacomm nearly $300,000 to help the agency build public support for a controversial highway plan in Northern Virginia, according to documents obtained by a state legislator through the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA).

State Del. Bob Marshall (R-13th), a vocal opponent of the Bi-County Parkway, a ten-mile highway that would connect Loudoun and Prince William Counties west of Dulles Airport and the Manassas battlefield, obtained the contract agreement that shows VDOT agreed to pay Stratacomm $289,228 for an array of services.

Although studied for a decade, VDOT has heavily promoted the project for only the past year, with a series of public meetings, presentations, and interviews with the news media. The public relations campaign has coincided with negotiations with the National Park Service to allow VDOT to pave over part of the western fringe of the Civil War battlefield in exchange for closing congested Rt. 234 through the battlefield. Those negotiations are nearing an end, but the partial shutdown of the federal government is delaying a final agreement.

“VDOT is saying in its scope of work that the effort will increase the credibility and trust of the Virginia Department of Transportation in the eyes of the public,” said Marshall. “If trust is lacking in VDOT, it is because of their own words and conflicting statements which they have made time and time again.”

Marshall, who is part of a group of conservative Republicans in the General Assembly fighting the Bi-County Parkway, blasted Secretary of Transportation Sean Connaughton for the decision to retain Stratacomm. The state is in effect using tax dollars to lobby public officials and sway residents, he said.

“They are misrepresenting to the public what they are doing. That is unacceptable public policy,” said Marshall. “Sean Connaughton should be ashamed of himself. This is, in fact, stealing from the public.”

Sec. Connaughton defended the move to hire Stratacomm as a response to critics like Marshall who claimed VDOT was not performing enough public outreach.

“As a consequence, we have turned to a consultant like we do with most communications efforts to meet with stakeholders, meet with elected officials, homeowners’ associations, to help organize a communications effort,” Connaughton said.

“The whole purpose is to educate the public on what this project is, what it is not, to dispel a lot of the myths and misinformation, so we can get the public to know what we’ve been working on for the last 12 years,” he added. “This is in direct response to complaints of Delegate Marshall and others in the General Assembly… they did not think we did enough public outreach regarding this effort.”

VDOT’s internal staffing has dropped from 8,500 to 7,100 in recent years, Connaughton said, so the agency does not have adequate staff to undertake large-scale public outreach efforts. Moreover, the transportation secretary said VDOT hires outside consultants for most large projects.

Opponents seized on the contract disclosure to criticize VDOT.

“It’s one thing to do outreach to encourage the public to participate in the study process and offer their input.  That’s a legitimate use of tax dollars, but to use tax dollars to fund what amounts to a propaganda campaign is another matter entirely,” said Stewart Schwartz, the executive director at the Coalition for Smarter Growth, which opposes large highway construction projects.

Once a final agreement is reached with the National Park Service and other signatories determining the Bi-County Parkway’s precise corridor, Virginia officials anticipate final environmental approval a few weeks later. The government shutdown is delaying the process.

Photo courtesy of Shawn Honnick. Click here to read the original story.

Dedicated lanes are integral to Montgomery BRT

Following two well-attended public hearings last week on the proposed Bus Rapid Transit system, the Montgomery County Council will now consider transit routes, approximate station locations, and rights-of-way. But one of the most significant policy issues will be whether the county gives transit priority on key routes with bus-only lanes.

Dedicated lanes allow for much faster, much more reliable service, which in turn attracts more riders and lowers costs per passenger. They make rapid transit a real alternative to driving in traffic, but removing general travel lanes to create bus-only lanes can be a hard sell to some members of the public. After all, many people consider it common sense that eliminating a lane of traffic will cause traffic to exponentially worsen.

Fortunately, evidence suggests that eliminating a lane often has no serious adverse effect on traffic. It may seem counter-intuitive, but removing a lane can occasionally cause traffic to flow better than it did before.

In 2002, a team of researchers looked at hundreds of situations where transportation planners reallocated roadspace away from general car travel. Most situations they examined experienced little to no increase in traffic, and in many cases local transportation planners reported, “the traffic has disappeared and we simply don’t know where it has gone to.”

The empirical evidence from dozens of case studies demonstrates that reducing roadspace for cars, especially when paired with providing better transit options for residents, can actually improve traffic operations. All of the case studies looked at affected and surrounding roads, and over half the cases saw more than a 10% reduction in traffic in the area.

Of the bus lanes studied in their report, there was an average 5% decrease in overall traffic. The study concludes that people make a much wider range of behavioral responses in these cases, including switching modes from driving to transit, chaining trips, or shifting their travel times away from peak hours.

Other recent traffic studies on repurposing lanes for transit have predicted a similar result. In Alexandria and Arlington, where the Potomac Yard-Crystal City BRT line will open in 2014, the traffic analysis for the environmental impact statement indicated that dedicating one curb lane in each direction to transit vehicles would cause no significant change in traffic flow.

In fact, modeling indicates that where repurposed curbside lanes are planned in Crystal City, exclusive lanes for buses help to channelize automobile flow and reduce traffic delays compared to not doing anything at all. In other parts of the corridor, the modeling predicted minor increases in traffic at a few intersections, balanced out by reductions in traffic at other intersections. Meanwhile, transit planners from Seattle tell us that their traffic study predicts a similar result on Aurora Avenue where plans call for repurposing two curb lanes for transit service.

In New York, data on traffic flow following the creation of bike lanes and bus lanes, as well as closing some streets to car traffic completely, indicates that traffic speeds have actually improved. The data matches similar observations in Brooklyn that travel times on Prospect Park West decreased after city planners converted a car lane to a bike lane several years ago.

The Maryland State Highway Administration is already planning on giving lane repurposing a try along the Purple Line on University Boulevard. SHA will reallocate two center lanes to the light rail line instead of widening an already large arterial road. The agency will make other improvements in the surrounding area to mitigate potential traffic impacts and keep people moving.

Planners and traffic engineers will be able to learn from that experience as they implement BRT in Montgomery County. The BRT plan recommends repurposed lanes where forecast transit ridership exceeds the capacity of a general traffic lane to move single occupant vehicles, a simple but sensible threshold.

While there are choke points along some of the corridors, in general, the proposed BRT routes are wide roads with six or more lanes. Montgomery planners and transportation officials alike seem to understand that continuing to widen these roads forever is not desirable, given the negative impact on neighborhoods and the long-term ineffectiveness of such an approach.

Lane repurposing offers the opportunity to move more people in Montgomery County’s limited road space. When combined with simultaneous improvements to bike and pedestrian networks that connect neighborhoods and work centers to the BRT stations, dedicated bus lanes offer Montgomery its best chance to create safer roadways that encourage walking, biking, and transit use.

Experience from other cities show that we can’t assume that traffic will increase. If we build a great system that can actually attract riders, traffic may not change much at all, and in fact may even decrease.

Photo courtesy of Oran Viriyincy. Click here to read the original story.