Photo: Kevin Kovaleski/Flickr
Category: Transportation
CSG Comments Re: WMATA FY2021 Budget
A copy of the letter below was sent on Tuesday, February 13, 2020 to the WMATA Board of Directors.
Dear Chairman Smedberg, members of the WMATA Board, and GM Wiedefeld:
The Coalition for Smarter Growth is a 23-year-old non-profit and leading organization in the D.C. region advocating for walkable, inclusive, transit-oriented communities. We partner with dozens of DC area conservation, housing, transit and smart growth non-profit, advocacy organizations, and the business community, and are founding members of the MetroNow coalition which was instrumental in helping WMATA win the first-ever dedicated funding for the agency. We also served on the Executive Committee of the Bus Transformation Project. Today, MetroNow and our non-profit partners are committed to winning implementation of the recommendations of the BTP, including dedicated bus lanes and network redesign for faster, more frequent and reliable service, more affordable fares for lower income residents, technology improvements for off-board fare collection, and more.
We support a number of provisions in the draft budget but are concerned about others, particularly the proposed changes and cuts to bus service.
We support:
Restoration of late night service: Late night service is particularly important for service workers at late- night businesses, especially those who live in Virginia and Maryland. We support restoring late-night service, while still ensuring time for needed maintenance.
Free transfers between bus and rail: Free transfers were a top recommendation from the Bus Transformation Project and the second-most requested bus improvement after bus lanes in the survey. They were the top recommendation among low-income riders along with more affordable fares overall.
Low and lower pass costs: Lower pass costs are particularly helpful for lower-income riders and can support the transition to off-board fare collection which will speed buses.
Improved weekend service for bus and rail: This will support the access to jobs for all those who do not have traditional Monday to Friday work schedules, and support the transition to car free and car-light living for the tens of thousands of residents moving into transit-oriented communities in the city and suburbs.
We oppose:
Increasing the cash fare for Metrobus: This should only be done in conjunction with a much-improved Metro SmarTrip Retail Outlet program, establishment of an off-board fare payment option for Priority Corridor Network routes, and a new integrated payment and trip planning system.
Charging peak fares after midnight: This is inequitable for late-night workers.
A $1 surcharge for MetroExtra: We should be encouraging people to use limited-stop service, which saves operating funds, increased ridership, and helps people get to their destinations faster. We should not create a two-tier system that hurts lower-income riders by discouraging their use of faster buses.
Bus service changes and cuts: While some reconfigurations listed in the proposal may make sense, we have received significant negative feedback from our members about the proposed changes. To the extent that service cuts are being forced by the arbitrary 3% operating cost growth cap, we urge the Virginia and Maryland jurisdictions to remove the cap.
We prefer that WMATA and the region initiate a process for bus network redesign. This process can start with the proposed development of common service standards for WMATA and local bus services based on the frequency and coverage needs of our region. But any allocation or reallocation of service to WMATA or the local jurisdictions and major service changes like those being proposed, should take place after a network redesign study.
We also urge all area jurisdictions to continue to increase their operating funding necessary to expand bus service while making it faster, frequent and reliable. With climate change, we must maximize our investment in transit to support walkable, transit-oriented communities, access to jobs, and reduction in total vehicle miles traveled.
Thank you,
Stewart Schwartz Executive Director
CSG testimony supporting SB 548
February 12, 2020
Finance Committee
Miller Senate Office Building, 3 East
Annapolis, MD 21401
SB 548, Transportation – I-270 Commuter Bus Route Study (Support)
Testimony for February 12, 2020
Jane Lyons, Maryland Advocacy Manager
Thank you, Chair Kelley, Vice Chair Feldman, and Finance Committee members. This testimony on behalf of the Coalition for Smarter Growth, the leading organization in the D.C. region advocating for walkable, inclusive, transit-oriented communities. We support the continuous improvement of Maryland’s commuter bus service as an avenue for a more sustainable, prosperous future.
SB 548 would require the Maryland Department of Transportation (MDOT) to study and make recommendations on the feasibility of establishing a commuter bus route that connects Maryland residents along the I-270 corridor to job centers in Northern Virginia. Currently, there are no commuter buses or any express bus service that crosses from Maryland into Virginia, despite Northern Virginia emerging as a major employment hub.
Increased commuter bus service will position Maryland as a competitive location for new jobs and housing as the DC region continues to grow. Although Maryland was not selected for Amazon’s HQ2, we can still take advantage of its proximity in National Landing by providing convenient public transit options from Maryland.
Along with being a tool for economic development, commuter buses help to relieve congestion and protect the environment by taking single-occupancy vehicles off the road. At a time when the state is considering an $11 billion project to add new express toll lanes in a misguided attempt to decrease congestion, we need to look at our existing strategies for reducing the number of cars on our roads, of which commuter buses is one of our best and most cost effective strategies.
Therefore, we urge you to support SB 548 so that MDOT will study a more sustainable transportation option that expands Marylander’s job opportunities. Thank you for your time.
MAST testimony supporting MD county consent bill HB 292
February 10, 2020
Environment and Transportation Committee
House Office Building, Room 251
Annapolis, MD 24101
HB 292, Toll Roads, Highways, and Bridges – County Government Consent Requirement – Expansion (Support)
Testimony for February 13, 2020
Thank you, Chair Barve, Vice Chair Stein, and Environment and Transportation Committee members. I am speaking on behalf of the Maryland Advocates for Sustainable Transportation (MAST), a coalition of 25 non-profit and community advocacy organizations committed to collaboration and coordination among local jurisdiction and the state when planning and implementing major transportation projects. We urge you to support HB 292, with amendments.
HB 292 would extend the requirement that the state receive the consent of a majority of affected Eastern Shore county governments before building a toll road, highway, or bridge in those counties. We strongly believe that this right should be expanded to include all Maryland counties affected by toll projects. We would support an amendment that clarifies the definition of “affected counties.”
Throughout the process to expand I-495 and I-270, one thing has been clear: the state has not adequately listened to or worked with the local jurisdictions that would bear the brunt of construction, environmental impacts, and toll payments. Even with the Maryland Department of Transportation’s (MDOT’s) recent commitment to improve coordination with counties, nothing guarantees that they must do so.
Without that guarantee, we’ve seen that the three-person Board of Public Works has the ability to push through massive highway projects without first considering local needs and concerns. Constructing a new toll road is an enormous decision that fundamentally alters the natural landscape by destroying homes, increasing greenhouse gas pollution, disrupting natural habitats, and promoting sprawl.
Therefore, we urge you to support HB 292 and equitably extend the right of nine counties to the other 15 counties and county-equivalents. Thank you for your consideration.
MAST Members: Audubon Naturalist Society, Bike Maryland, Central Maryland Transportation Alliance, Chesapeake Bay Foundation, Chesapeake Physicians for Social Responsibility, Coalition for Smarter Growth, Greater Farmland Civic Association, Greater Greater Washington, Howard County Climate Action, Interfaith Power & Light (DC.MD.NoVA) League of Women Voters of Maryland, Maryland Legislative Coalition, National Parks Conservation Association, Sierra Club Maryland, Smart Growth Maryland, Washington Area Bicyclist Association
MAST Principles Signers: 350 Montgomery, Baltimore Transit Equity Coalition, Cedar Lane Unitarian Universalist Church, Environmental Justice Ministry, Corazón Latino, Friends of Sligo Creek, Neighbors of the Northwest Branch, Northwood-Four Corners Civic Association, Rails to Trails Conservancy, Sunrise Movement Howard County
CSG testimony supporting Montgomery County CIP amendments
January 30, 2020
Montgomery County Council Office
Council Office Building
100 Maryland Ave.
Rockville, MD 20850
FY 21 Capital Budget and FY 21-26 CIP (Support with Amendments)
Testimony for February 5th, 2020
Jane Lyons, Maryland Advocacy Manager
President Katz and Councilmembers, thank you for the opportunity to speak today. I am here on behalf of the Coalition for Smarter Growth, which supports the FY 21-26 CIP with several critical amendments. We are pleased with the support the County Executive’s CIP gives to bicycle and pedestrian safety, the Bethesda station south entrance, and bus stop improvements. These projects are a necessity if we want to end unnecessary tragedies on our streets.
Missing projects: Given that, I’ll begin with what we believe is missing: funding for the northern entrance for the White Flint Metro station, the Capital Crescent Trail tunnel in Bethesda, and a multi-use path along Dale Drive. These projects will support economic development and increase both Metro and Purple Line ridership. They also both specifically address safety along MD 355, one of the most dangerous and deadly roads in the county, where two people have already been killed in 2020.
Bus Rapid Transit: Regarding BRT, we are happy that this CIP includes funding for preliminary engineering of BRT on MD 355, Veirs Mill Rd, New Hampshire Ave, and the North Bethesda Transitway. However, given our economic development and climate crises, these projects cannot wait and should be advanced to start even sooner. Likewise, it is disappointing that there is no money included in the CIP for BRT construction. This is especially disappointing when every road project includes costs for both preliminary engineering and construction. Not one BRT project has a construction timeline. I hope the Council will prioritize BRT by actively planning for its implementation.
Specifically, I hope you will accelerate the preliminary engineering timeline for MD 355 – four years is much longer than needed – and schedule planning for New Hampshire Ave and North Bethesda Transitway to begin much earlier than FY22 and FY24, respectively. At this rate, we can expect that service wouldn’t begin on these lines until at least 2026. Can our economy or climate wait that long? Can transit-dependent residents in Gaithersburg or Germantown wait that long for high quality transit, especially in light of the Corridor Cities Transitway cancellation?
MCDOT has proposed that MD 355 BRT service be broken into three routes since the full 22 mile route is too long for an ideal level of frequency. This effectively breaks up construction and service commencement into three phases. I recommend that the Council select a design alternative (Alternative B); then when preliminary engineering and design for the first phase is complete, construction could begin on that phase while the second phase undergoes preliminary engineering and design, and so on.
Finally, we firmly believe that Route 29 BRT will not set a good example without dedicated lanes south of Tech Road. MCDOT’s median lane study was supposed to be released last fall. This report should be shared with the Council immediately so that any construction funding can be included in the CIP.
Ride On improvements: Given slow progress, most BRT service in the county won’t be operational for five to ten years. We recommend that MCDOT take the success of Ride On extRa and expand express bus service to the other future BRT corridors. Ride On extRa Route 101 increased ridership by 11 percent and reduced travel times by 25 percent. MCDOT should also officially name priority service corridors, similar to WMATA’s Priority Corridor Network, which has helped WMATA to quickly improve service in phases.
As mentioned, we are pleased with the continued upgrade of Ride On’s 5,400 bus stops. The CIP details a GIS bus stop inventory and condition assessment, criteria for improvements, and prioritization. To the best of our knowledge, that information is not easily available to the public. We request that MCDOT publicly post that information, especially their criteria for improvements and prioritization.
Additionally, we urge the county to prioritize electric vehicle replacement. Most replacements for the Ride On fleet are set to be hybrids; however, the proposed CIP still details that 80 of the 153 vehicles will be diesel.
Affordable housing: We are grateful to the County Executive for creating the new Affordable Housing Opportunity Fund to help acquire properties in areas with growing rents. This fund supports the recommendations we crafted as members of the Purple Line Corridor Coalition Housing Action Team. We hope the County Executive and DHCA will continue to work with affordable housing developers to craft a program that best fits their financing needs.
School capital projects: Finally, we want to support funding for school capital projects, especially those that will relieve clusters in moratorium. However, we should note that the incentive created by the moratorium to fund capacity projects leaves out the vital capital needs of schools that are falling apart but aren’t overcapacity. Through the SSP update process, we hope to revisit the moratorium, and replace it with a policy that better serves the needs of both schools and housing.
Given the challenge of a shrinking capital budget and so many urgent projects, it’s time for the Council to start considering new funding sources. We will not meet our economic development, climate, and equity goals without significant investments the infrastructure that allows us to thrive. Thank you for your time.