Category: Maryland

RELEASE: Another Potomac River Bridge Study?

Posted on by Max Potter

Coalition for Smarter Growth, Piedmont Environmental Council Sierra Club – Virginia Chapter

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
FEBRUARY 6, 2014

Contact: Stewart Schwartz, CSG, 703-599-6437 (C)
Chris Miller, PEC, 540-347-2334

Another Potomac River Bridge Study?
Proposed Legislation Could Inject a Hot Potato into Congressional Race

Proposed legislation by Delegates Tom Rust and Randy Minchew threatens to throw a hot potato into the middle of the pending race to succeed Congressman Frank Wolf, igniting a repeat of the neighborhood outcry that followed past bridge proposals. Citing an in-house study quietly initiated by the former Secretary of Transportation Sean Connaughton, the bill (HB1244) would effectively endorse continuation of the Connaughton study and encourage VDOT to recommend a location or locations for new bridges, if needed.

The bill is currently before the House Appropriations Committee which could hear it Friday, February 7th.

The patrons are proposing that the state spend additional staff resources on the study even though the State of Maryland has reiterated its opposition to new bridge crossings in an October 2012 letter to former Secretary Connaughton. Moreover, in 2012, the House Rules committee rejected a similar bill, HJ131, after having confirmed that the State of Maryland remained strongly opposed to new Potomac River bridge crossings.

“Back in 2000 and 2001, after Congressman Wolf funded a federal study of new bridge crossings, the proposed alignments were found to have significant community impacts and generated a firestorm of community opposition,” said Stewart Schwartz, Executive Director of the Coalition for Smarter Growth. Congressman Wolf had the study discontinued, noting that because of existing land uses a new bridge and connecting highways could not be built without significant impact on neighborhoods in the path.

A subsequent “Origin/Destination Study” study in 2003-2004 by VDOT tracked every license plate crossing the American Legion Bridge and those entering and exiting the Beltway from every entrance/exit between Route 50 in Virginia to Georgia Avenue in Maryland. The results showed that very few vehicles were making the so-called “U-shaped” commute from Reston and beyond to the Rockville/Gaithersburg area and vice versa. The vast majority of commutes needed to use the American Legion Bridge and Beltway or were making strictly radial (in-out) trips.

“Based on past studies, we are convinced that these bridges would waste scarce transportation dollars, have no effect on congestion on the Beltway and other major highways, harm water quality and the historic C&O Canal and open up the Montgomery County Agricultural Reserve and other rural land to development,” said Douglas Stewart, Transportation Chair for the Virginia Chapter of the Sierra Club. “This region has made a strong commitment to transit and transit-oriented development including investment in the Silver Line and Tysons Corner. Outer Beltways undercut that investment, diverting private development to areas that are far removed from infrastructure and amenities, generating significant new traffic,” said Chris Miller, President of the Piedmont Environmental Council.

In their letter the State of Maryland makes clear that they to not intend to “revisit the years of debate over new crossings of the Potomac River” and instead want to focus on potential improvements to existing crossings including the American Legion Bridge, the Route 301 Henry Nice Bridge and transit on the Woodrow Wilson Bridge. Since 2012, Fairfax County and Montgomery County elected officials and staffs have been discussing how to improve transit in the American Legion Bridge corridor.

“We believe the proposed studies are unnecessary, wasteful and a diversion of time and attention from fixing the American Legion Bridge corridor and other key commuter corridors with multimodal solutions,” said Schwartz. “The region should continue its focus on implementing key transit projects like the Silver Line, Purple Line, Montgomery County Rapid Transit Network, streetcars and mixed-use transit-oriented development. The benefits will be significant in terms of maximizing transit, walking, biking and carpooling and reducing the number and length of vehicle trips region-wide.”

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

 

###

Testimony to Montgomery Co Council on FY15-20 Capital Improvements Program Transportation Budget

Testimony to Montgomery Co Council on FY15-20 Capital Improvements Program Transportation Budget

Posted on by acustis

Thank you for this opportunity to comment on the FY15-20 Capital Improvements Program. My name is Kelly Blynn and I am speaking on behalf of the Coalition for Smarter Growth, the leading non-profit group advocating for transit and walkable communities in the DC region, which counts thousands of supporters in Montgomery County.

RELEASE: Advocates urge Prince George’s County and state to target funds to transportation projects supporting smart growth

Posted on by Max Potter

Prince George’s County and regional smart growth advocates sent a letter today to Prince George’s County Executive Rushern Baker urging him to rethink transportation priorities to fulfill the County’s efforts to foster transit-oriented economic development.

Planners approve transportation priorities for D.C. region

Posted on by Max Potter

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

Posted on by Max Potter

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

Posted on by Mitch Margolis

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

Posted on by Mitch Margolis

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

Posted on by acustis

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

Posted on by acustis

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

Posted on by Mitch Margolis

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.