Category: News

RELEASE: New report identifies key ways to make Montgomery County’s bus rapid transit succeed

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
September 1, 2015

CONTACT
Pete Tomao, Coalition for Smarter Growth
202-675-0016
pete@smartergrowth.net

MONTGOMERY COUNTY, MD — In 2013, the Montgomery County Council unanimously approved a plan for an 81-mile Rapid Transit network based on modern bus rapid transit. Today, appointed citizen task forces are working with county and state staff and consultants to design the network’s first three corridors. But the success of the system depends on getting the details right in order to provide high-quality, frequent, reliable and rapid service.

A new report, “Best Practices in Rapid Transit Design,” provides a roadmap for what’s needed to make Montgomery County’s Rapid Transit System a success.

DOWNLOAD OR VIEW THE FULL REPORT [PDF]

RTS-Best-Practices-thumbnail

The report, released jointly today by Communities for Transit and the Coalition for Smarter Growth, draws lessons from successful bus rapid transit systems throughout the US and Canada. “As of 2015, there are more than 30 bus rapid transit systems in operation across the US and Canada and more than 25 others in planning. Many have been running since the early 2000s, and have greatly exceeded expectations for ridership and service,” said Pete Tomao, the Coalition for Smarter Growth’s Montgomery County Advocacy Manager. “In Eugene, OR, for example, the Emerald Line has doubled transit ridership in the corridor it serves.”

“Our report is designed to assist the citizen task force members, elected officials and staff in their deliberations,” said Tomao. The report identifies and describes over a dozen features of successful bus rapid transit, including:

  • dedicated lanes for vehicles to bypass traffic
  • frequent and reliable service
  • stops spaced farther apart than local buses
  • 10’ general travel lanes
  • comfortable stations
  • offboard fare collection
  • level boarding
  • easy, safe access for people walking and bicycling
  • real time arrival information.

“BRT systems can produce travel time savings of up to 25% compared to other transit and can move far more people between home, work, school and services along our crowded arterial corridors than can single-occupant vehicles,” said Tomao. “The county’s ability to manage growth and traffic, and to attract the next generation workforce and companies, depends on investing in a well-designed system that attracts passengers because of its quality, efficiency, speed, and reliability.”

“In our research, we’ve found that successful systems around the country consistently share the same features, which we outline in our report and which we hope will be incorporated into Montgomery’s system,” Tomao concluded.

Earlier this year, Montgomery County appointed citizen task forces for each of the network’s first three bus rapid transit corridors: Route 355, Viers Mill Road, and Route 29. The task forces began meeting in Feb 2015 and are split into five groups — MD 355 North, MD 355 South, US29 North, US 29 South, and Veirs Mill Rd. Key decisions include whether to provide dedicated right-of-way, street and station design, fare collection, stop locations and more.  The corridor task forces are separate from the Transit Task Force appointed to recommend how to finance the system and who should operate it.

About the Coalition for Smarter Growth

The Coalition for Smarter Growth is the leading organization in the Washington DC 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 and investments needed to make those communities flourish.  Learn more at smartergrowth.net.

About Communities for Transit

Communities for Transit (CFT) educates the public on the planned & unanimously-approved Rapid Transit System for Montgomery County, MD. CFT focuses on community outreach to build awareness of the compelling case for rapid transit as an effective response to our unsustainable traffic problems.  Learn more at communitiesfortransit.org

 

###

Not everyone thinks D.C. traffic is the worst

WASHINGTON — This week, an annual Texas Transportation Institute report once again found that the D.C. metro region has the worst traffic in the country.

But not everyone agrees with the report’s findings.  Transit advocates point out that the report focuses solely on highways and ignores the role mass transit plays in taking cars off the road.

“The annual report from that Texas group is always great for grabbing headlines, but the report itself is flawed, biased and frankly not helpful for D.C., Maryland and Virginia residents,” said Alex Posorske of the Coalition for Smarter Growth.

Posorske said the report does not account for potential congestion avoided by hundreds of thousands of residents who commute via transit, bicycle or their feet.

The transit group points out that millennials are moving to areas like D.C., Arlington, Alexandria, and Tysons in Virginia, and Bethesda, Silver Spring, White Flint, Hyattsville in Maryland–locations where they can use public transit, walk or bike around.  Many of these millennials don’t even own cars.

But when you talk about transit, you have to talk about Metro. It is the primary transit option in the region.  Even ardent defenders of Metro agree that the agency has had a tough year, and customers are starting to wonder if the system is reliable.

“As a regular Metro rider, I can tell you that three out of every four trips I take are uneventful and relatively on time.  That’s not a great percentage, by the way.  It’s far short of what a world class system ought to be doing,” said Falls Church Vice Mayor Dave Snyder, who serves on the regional Transportation Planning Board.  “But compare that to being on I-95 or I-66, where you’re guaranteed that every day the congestion will be bad, or if there is an accident on top of it, it’ll be even worse,”

Snyder and Posorske agree that the solution to the transportation problems in this region is to offer options.  Develop a reliable rail system, enhance the bus network, and continue to build and support walkable and bikeable communities.  Snyder said it’s about offering people options and making the alternatives as attractive as possible, then leaving the decision up to the individual.

Read this at WTOP >>

Pro-Transit Group Attacks D.C. Traffic Congestion Report As Deeply Flawed

We’re No. 1 again. But what does it mean?

study by researchers at the Texas A&M Transportation Institute (TTI) confirms what most car commuters already think: The D.C. metropolitan region has the worst traffic congestion in the country.

But critics of the institute’s methodology say the report rests on false assumptions and draws misleading conclusions because it ignores region-wide gains in commuting by transit, walking, and biking. In the District itself, city data shows that roughly two-thirds of all work trips are in modes other than single-occupant vehicles, for instance.

“The report’s authors don’t really understand the region. They are telling D.C., Maryland, and Virginia residents that at the end of the day we need to spend billions of dollars on new highway connections, new capacity, for cars,” said Alex Posorske, the managing director at the Coalition for Smarter Growth, a pro-transit group that lobbies against most highway expansions.

TTI’s Urban Mobility Scorecard, the first issued since 2012, found the average auto commuter in the Washington area spends 82 hours a year sitting in traffic. The region was ranked at the top — or the bottom, if you are sick of gridlock — in the 2012 report, too.

Tim Lomax, one of the report’s authors, said expanding road capacity is only one of their proposed remedies for reducing congestion, which also include additional transit investment combined with denser real estate development.

“I certainly agree with that. I just don’t see that our report should reflect their preferences about what the solutions ought to be,” said Lomax in response to the coalition’s criticisms.

The transit advocates sought to poke holes in TTI’s research, pointing out that the report ranks “the cities with the strongest transit systems the worst on congestion, ignoring the much lower automobile commute mode shares in the transit cities, and therefore the lower per-commuter congestion delays,” a statement said.

Accounting for population increases

In an interview with WAMU 88.5, Posorske said the report ignores long-term trends that demonstrate driving has either declined or leveled off.

“In D.C. we’ve got 83,000 new residents in the last decade. Over that time, commute times for D.C. residents have stayed consistent. We’ve had 83,000 new residents who, by and large, do not own cars, who take transit, walk, or bike to work,” he said.

“If you move over to Arlington, from 1996 to last year we saw significant decreases in total traffic on some major arteries in Arlington,” Posorske added. “And this is at a time when they’ve added millions of square feet of new development and added 50,000 residents.”

In response to the coalition’s criticism, Lomax conceded the report’s methodology does not take into account non-car commuting modes.

“They have some good points,” Lomax said. “And they are points that we have included not only in our proposed solutions, but also in terms of our methodology.”

“We have backed away from trying to make estimates of what is happening on the transit side because we don’t have very good transit data. We don’t have good data about how people are walking. So we concentrated on where we have the data,” he said.

Read this on WAMU >> 

D.C. Has Worst Traffic in U.S., Study Says

More jobs and cheaper gasoline come with a big, honking downside: U.S. roads are more clogged than ever now that the recession is in the rearview mirror.

Commuters in Washington, D.C., suffer the most, losing an average of 82 hours a year to rush-hour slowdowns, a new study finds. Los Angeles, San Francisco and New York come next on the list of urban areas with the longest delays.

But the pain reaches across the nation.

Overall, American motorists are stuck in traffic about 5 percent more than they were in 2007, the pre-recession peak, says the report from the Texas A&M Transportation Institute and INRIX Inc., which analyzes traffic data.

D.C. Tops US Traffic Rankings

D.C. ranks number one for time spent in traffic, among all U.S. cities. NBC4 reporter Meagan Fitzgerald has the story on how much gas and time commuters are wasting sitting in traffic. (Published Wednesday, Aug. 26, 2015)

Four out of five cities have now surpassed their 2007 congestion.

Rounding out the Top 10 worst commuting cities are San Jose, Boston, Seattle, Chicago, Houston and Riverside-San Bernardino.

Cities with fast-growing economies and the most job growth are the most plagued by traffic. Other factors: Urban populations are increasing and lower fuel prices are making driving less expensive, so more people are taking to city roads.

David Alpert, founder of the D.C. transportation website Greater Greater Washington, said transportation in the area is improving.

“Unlike what some people have been seeing or hearing, there’s definitely traffic on the roads, but it actually seems to have stayed about even over the last few years,” he said.

The advocacy group the Coalition for Smarter Growth called the report “deeply flawed.”

“The report exaggerates congestion, underplays the major declines in driving by large demographic groups and ignores the wide ranging economic, social and environmental benefits of smart growth policies and transit, pedestrian and bicycle investments,” Executive Director Stewart Schwartz said in a statement.

Congestion increased in 61 of the nation’s 101 largest cities from 2012 to 2013, the data showed. The following year, nearly all cities – 95 out of 101 – experienced greater congestion.

The findings are based on federal data about how many cars are on the roads and on traffic speed data collected by INRIX on 1.3 million miles of urban streets and highways.

The growth is outpacing the nation’s ability to build the roads, bridges, trains and other infrastructure to handle all these people on the move. Congress has kept federal transportation programs teetering on the edge of insolvency for nearly eight years because lawmakers have been unwilling to raise the federal gas tax and haven’t found a politically palatable alternative to pay for needed improvements.

Frustrated by Washington’s inaction, nearly a third of states have approved measures this year that could collectively raise billions of dollars for transportation through higher fuel taxes, vehicle fees and bonds. But that’s just a down payment on decades of delayed maintenance, repairs and replacements.

“Our growing traffic problem is too massive for any one entity to handle – state and local agencies can’t do it alone,” said Tim Lomax, a co-author of the report. The report recommends a mix of solutions, including making existing road and transit systems more efficient, encouraging more flexible work schedules, adding capacity to high-growth travel corridors, and creating more high-density neighborhoods where homes, offices, stores and other development can be reached through walking, biking or public transit.

Transportation analyst Alan Pisarski said the nation missed a “tremendous opportunity” to catch up on building additional transportation capacity during the recession, when construction costs plummeted. “We didn’t take advantage of it and now we’re back in the soup again,” he said.

The national average time that commuters wasted stuck in traffic last year was 42 hours, about the same as in 2007 and more than twice the delay in 1982, when the transportation institute first began assessing urban mobility. But because there are so many more commuters today and far more congestion in off-peak hours, total delay across the country has increased over 2007.

Overall, Americans experienced 6.9 billion hours of traffic delays in 2014 compared to 6.6 billion in 2007 and 1.8 billion in 1982.

The problem has become so bad in major urban areas that drivers have to plan for more than twice as much travel time as they would normally need to account for the possibility of congestion delays caused by bad weather, collisions, construction zones and other impediments, the report said.

Other findings in the report:

– Trucks account for about 18 percent of urban congestion, although they represent just 7 percent of urban travel.

-The cost of congestion to the average auto commuter was $960 in lost time and fuel in 2014, compared to an inflation-adjusted $400 in 1982.

– About 40 percent of delays occur in midday and overnight hours, making it more difficult to avoid delays by avoiding commuter rush hours.

– Severe or extreme congestion levels affected one of every four trips in 2014, up from one in nine trips in 1982.

The report comes on the heels of other evidence that Americans are embracing driving more than ever. The Department of Transportation said Americans drove more than 3 trillion miles in the last 12 months, surpassing the previous record set in 2007. And the National Safety Council said preliminary data for the first six months of this year shows traffic deaths are up 14 percent, a turnaround after years of fewer fatalities.

If the economy remains strong, congestion will continue to worsen, the report projects. In the next five years, the annual delay per commuter would grow from 42 to 47 hours, the total delay nationwide would grow from 6.9 billion hours to 8.3 billion hours, and the total cost of congestion would jump from $160 billion to $192 billion, researchers estimated.

The following are urban areas ranked by the average annual extra hours commuters spend in their cars due to delay, together with the cost in lost time and fuel.

1. Washington, D.C.-Virginia-Maryland, 82 hours, $1,834

2. Los Angeles-Long Beach-Anaheim, 80 hours, $1,711

3. San Francisco-Oakland, 78 hours, $1,675

4. New York-Newark, New Jersey-Connecticut, 74 hours, $1,739

5. San Jose, California, 67 hours, $1,422

6. Boston-New Hampshire-Rhode Island, 64 hours, $1,388

7. Seattle, 63 hours, $1,491

8. Chicago-Indiana, 61 hours, $1,445

8. Houston, 61 hours, $1,490

10. Riverside-San Bernardino, California, 59 hours, $1,316

11. Dallas-Fort Worth-Arlington, 53 hours, $1,185

12. Atlanta, 52 hours,$1,130

12. Detroit, 52 hours, $1,183

12. Miami, 52 hours, $1,169

12. Austin, Texas, 52 hours, $1,159

12. Portland, Oregon, 52 hours, $1,273

17. Phoenix-Mesa, 51 hours, $1,201

18. Honolulu, 50 hours, $1,125

19. Bridgeport-Stamford, Connecticut, 49 hours, $1,174

19. Denver-Aurora, 49 hours, $1,101

19. Oklahoma City, 49 hours, $1,110

22. Philadelphia, 48 hours, $1,112

23. Baton Rouge, Louisiana, 47 hours, $1,262

23. Tucson, Arizona, 47 hours, $1,128

23. Baltimore, 47 hours, $1,115

23. Minneapolis-St. Paul, 47 hours, $1,035

Read this on NBC4 >>

RELEASE: Annual Congestion Report is Flawed, Biased, and Ignores Smart Growth Solutions

WASHINGTON DC — Once again, the Texas Transportation Institute (TTI) has issued its annual congestion report and has ranked the Washington DC region number one for congestion. “TTI’s annual congestion report is great for grabbing headlines, but the report is deeply flawed and biased in not accounting for the congestion avoided by hundreds of thousands of DC area residents due to our smart growth policies and transit investments,” said Stewart Schwartz, Executive Director of the Coalition for Smarter Growth. “The report exaggerates congestion, underplays the major declines in driving by large demographic groups, and ignores the wide ranging economic, social, and environmental benefits of smart growth policies and transit, pedestrian and bicycle investments.”

Montgomery County Planners Peeking Ahead Into Bethesda’s Future

BETHESDA, Md. — Montgomery County planners are considering what Bethesda will look like in the next 20 years — and what they’re anticipating includes nearly twice as many apartments and a lot more park land.

It was one of the first successful transit-oriented spots in the region. It includes even more people with even more office space, parks, and places to live, and not just in the areas right on top of the Metro station.

Experts like Leslie Howerton, a planner coordinator with the Montgomery County Planning Department, worry there won’t be enough housing to meet demand in the coming decades since the population is expected to surge another 20 to 25 percent.

“Knowing growth is coming we have to put it somewhere… and we feel its best to focus that in urban downtown areas where there’s transit,” Howardson says.

The areas they’re targeting for redevelopment include the offices around the downtown Metro station, including the ones part of the Metro plaza. Other priority areas include the blocks on the north and south ends of downtown along Wisconsin Avenue, and just east of there on East-West Highway.

The next wave of new apartment buildings in downtown Bethesda will have even more units.

Stewart Schwartz with the Coalition for Smarter Growth calls it “Bethesda 2.0.”

“This allows us to reduce the demand on our roadways, making them work better,” Howardson says. “Allowing additional development on top of the Metro station will generate the revenues as well as provide the timing and opportunity to redo the transit center.”

The next public meeting on the drafting of this plan will be held Sept. 17.

Read this on CBS DC >>

STATEMENT on WMATA leadership failures by Coalition for Smarter Growth Executive Director Stewart Schwartz

STATEMENT on WMATA leadership failures by Coalition for Smarter Growth Executive Director Stewart Schwartz

WASHINGTON DC — In view of the report by Acting General Manager Jack Requa yesterday regarding WMATA’s significant failures with regard to rail track repair that led to the recent derailment, the Coalition for Smarter Growth calls again for unified action by our elected officials and priority hiring of a General Manager who is an experienced and successful manager, a transit system veteran, and above all, a leader who can build morale and personal commitment among staff, demand and generate top performance, and create a culture of safety, positive customer service, and pride.

Fairfax board votes to move forward on Seven Corners redevelopment

After hours of discussion and debate Tuesday that stretched toward midnight, the Fairfax County Board of Supervisors voted 8-1, with one member absent, to move forward with an ambitious redevelopment plan for the traffic-choked Seven Corners area.

The plan would create three villages and add several thousand homes to the area, along with restaurants, shops and a street grid that could draw local traffic away from the confusing Seven Corners intersection.

The board argued over affordable housing and density before the vote on proposed changes to county planning guidelines, changes that would allow the redevelopment to take place.

“I do not think that there is value in deferring this any longer,” said Supervisor Penelope A. Gross (D-Mason), who represents the area and was referring to a nearly three-year-long community discussion marked by intense debate.

Residents of the neighborhoods of single-family homes that surround Seven Corners have opposed some aspects of the plan, saying it would lead to increased density and worsen traffic in the area, home to the Seven Corners Shopping Center.

This month, the county’s Planning Commission adopted an amended version of the original plan in an attempt to address community concerns. Although the revised plan reduced the number of new houses and apartments by several hundred units — bringing the total closer to 5,000 — it still generated worries.

During the hearing, about 40 people lined up inside the Fairfax County Government Center to express both support and concerns about the plan.

“Density, particularly residential density, must not be so high that the accompanying people overwhelm the support-services system, particularly schools and transportation,” James Kilbourne, president of the Lake Barcroft homeowners association, said to applause.

County officials say the plan’s latest version makes several compromises in response to community concerns, including worries about school crowding that would result from adding more residents.

The site of the former Willston Elementary School would also feature a second building that would house a day-care center, social services for school families and the multicultural center, Gross said.

“That is going to be many years in the future, because there is no money right now,” Gross said, referring to the idea of a new “urban-style school” inside a high-rise building. “But we are committed.”

Gross said the overall redevelopment plan is an attempt to bring new life to an area of Fairfax that has become worn in the years since the Seven Corners Shopping Center was a regional draw in the 1950s and 1960s. She called it a road map for what the county will look like in the next 50 years.

“We need to make sure that whole area is ready for all the newcomers who are going to be coming here,” Gross said. “We need to make sure that the community that is being developed is what they would like to live in.”

Urban-planning groups say the kind of walkable, transit-friendly communities envisioned for Seven Corners are needed in aging suburbs that have become homes to mostly vacant office buildings and discount stores with little commercial traffic.

“The future of Fairfax lies in these aging commercial corridors,” said Stewart Schwartz, executive director of the Coalition for Smarter Growth. “It certainly can be a win-win and enhance Fairfax’s competitiveness.”

Read original article here.

Fairfax board to vote on Seven Corners plan that has sparked heated debate

Fairfax County’s Board of Supervisors is expected to vote Tuesday on whether to move forward with an ambitious redevelopment plan for the traffic-choked Seven Corners area.

The plan to create three villages in the area would add several thousand new homes to the neighborhood, along with restaurants and shops and a new grid of streets that could draw local traffic away from the confusing Seven Corners intersection that is often backed up with cars and trucks.

Tuesday’s vote would addresses changes to county planning guidelines for Seven Corners that would allow the redevelopment to happen.

Residents from the neighborhoods of single-family homes that surround Seven Corners have opposed some aspects of the plan, arguing that it would bring in too much density and worsen traffic in the area, which is home to the Seven Corners Shopping Center.

Earlier this month, the county planning commission passed an amended version of the original plan that attempted to address community concerns. Though the plan’s new version reduced by several hundred units the overall number of new homes and apartments to be created – bringing the total closer to 5,000 — it still faces some opposition.

“It’s trending in the right direction, but if you talk to people and say it’s 5,000 units . . . in the Seven Corners area, they go: Whoa,” said Marty Machowsky, a local homeowner who who plans to testify during a public hearing scheduled Tuesday before the vote.

“How many total people does that mean and how many more cars will that generate?” Machowsky said. “We can hardly get through the Seven Corners area on a Saturday now.”

County officials say the plan’s latest version makes several compromises in response to community concerns. Among them are worries about school overcrowding that would result from adding more residents.

County executive Edward L. Long and Fairfax schools superintendent Karen Garza have agreed to work toward building a new school on the site of a former elementary school in the area that is now home to a multicultural center serving low-income immigrants who live nearby, officials said.

The site of the former Willston Elementary School would also feature a second building that would house a day care, social services for school families and the multicultural center, said Supervisor Penelope A. Gross (D-Mason,) who represents the area.

“That is going to be many years in the future because there is no money right now,” Gross said, about the idea of a new “urban-style school” inside a high-rise building. “But we are committed.”

Gross said the overall redevelopment plan is an attempt to bring new life to an area of Fairfax County that has been worn down since the Seven Corners mall was a regional draw for shoppers during the 1950s and ‘60s. She called it a road map for what Fairfax County will look like in the next 50 years.

“We need to make that whole area is ready for all the newcomers who are going to be coming here,” Gross said. “We need to make sure that the community that is being developed is what they would like to live in.”

Urban planning groups say the kind of walkable, transit-friendly communities envisioned for Seven Corners are needed in aging suburbs that have become homes to mostly vacant office buildings and discount stores with little commercial traffic.

“The future of Fairfax lies in these aging commercial corridors,” said Stewart Schwartz, executive director of the Coalition for Smart Growth. “It certainly can be a win-win and enhance Fairfax’s competitiveness.”

Michelle Krocker, who heads the Northern Virginia Affordable Housing Alliance, said there aren’t enough guarantees in the plan to keep lower-income families from being pushed out, which could have long-term repercussions for the Washington region.

“If there’s no place for them to live affordably, we potentially lose them as employees in the area or they move far out into the hinterlands,” Krocker said. “And, then they’d have to commute in, and that’s problematic for everybody.”

Read original article here.