Posts about BW Parkway
Roads
Feds, Maryland examine widening Balt.-Wash. Parkway
Widening the Baltimore-Washington parkway would let it carry more vehicles, but would not make traffic any better. That's the conclusion from a federal study that looked at adding a third lane in each direction.
The study, by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), looks at widening the parkway between Route 50 and the Baltimore Beltway. FHWA will be sending the results of the study to Congress soon.
FHWA is studying the widening because Rep. Dutch Ruppersburger (D-MD) inserted an earmark into the FY 2010 federal budget. There's no actual proposal to widen the Parkway (at least not yet).
There's a very good chance that nothing further will come from the study. And that's the way it should be. The region does not need to invest hundreds of millions in this corridor simply to move more cars. Increasing mobility means moving more people, and here that should mean improving transit options The study looked at 4 options for widening the parkway in addition to a no-build alternative. Two alternatives looked at adding a lane in each direction in the median. The other two alternatives studied adding a lane in each direction to the outside of the roadway. Space constraints mean that any widening requires a combination of both inside and outside widening as well as rebuilding numerous overpasses and underpasses.
The difference between the two inside and two outside designs is in design standards. For each type of widening, the consultants looked at AASHTO-compliant standards and National Park Service standards.
The AASHTO options called for adding a 12-foot wide travel lane, a 10-foot wide outside (right) shoulder, and a 10-foot wide inside (left) shoulder. The NPS options included adding a 12-foot wide travel lane, an 8-foot wide outside shoulder with curb and gutter, and a 3-foot wide inside shoulder with curb and gutter.
Estimated costs ranged from a high of $565 million for the AASHTO outside widening option to a low of $343 million for the NPS inside widening option.
Despite the investment, though, the study shows that the Parkway would be just as congested as it is today by the year 2040. FHWA expects any increase in capacity to be matched by a corresponding increase in vehicle trips. A widened parkway would carry more cars, but it ultimately wouldn't shorten people's trips.
Widening the parkway is the wrong approach from a growth perspective, too. Prince George's County has long had a problem focusing growth in the "developed tier." Adding freeway capacity will only increase the pressure to build in parts of the county and the region that do not have the infrastructure for it.
Adding lanes to the parkway would also hurt the developed communities it passes through. In many places, it already forms a significant barrier between neighborhoods. More traffic and more pollution along the roadway will hurt many residents and the pastoral image the National Park Service believes the Parkway should exude.
Staff at the meeting stressed that further studies would need to look at options beyond just widening the parkway. Other options could include improvements to transit, other roadways, or spot "improvements" along the BW Parkway.
If any money were available for widening, it would be better spent on improving transit between Baltimore and Washington. Maryland could speed up trains on MARC and Amtrak's Northeast Corridor and add capacity for more trains, extend Metro's Green Line, or create incentives for carpooling.
As the region continues to grow, we need to focus on building livable and walkable communities. Widening a freeway encourages traditional sprawl, and it sends the wrong message about the region's priorities.
Comments on the study are still being accepted, though only for the next 2 to 3 weeks. If you have thoughts on whether the parkway needs extra lanes, you can submit written comments on the project's website.
The next step for the project team is to finalize a report to Congress showing the estimated costs, benefits, and impacts of adding a third northbound and third southbound lane to the roadway. Beyond that, it's up to Congress to decide whether to leave the Parkway as-is, undertake further study, or begin to plan for construction.
History
How far has bicycling come since 1979?
The year was 1979. The Iranian Revolution led to oil shortages and long lines at the pump. Maryland Governor Harry Hughes proposed rationing gas. Levittown drivers rioted when gas prices rose to a whopping $1 a gallon. And large numbers of people tried bicycling to work.
Peter Harnik wrote an op-ed in the June 23, 1979 Washington Post about the sudden rise in bicycling:
On Wednesday night, there was another unearthly sound, the noise of thousands of people rummaging through their basements, oiling chains, dusting gearshifts, inflating tires, tightening spokes, looking for locks.And, like the emergence of some giant strain of locusts, the bikes appeared on Thursday
— Fujis replacing Datsuns, Gitanes replacing Citroens, Raleighs replacing Triumphs, and Sears and Schwinns replacing Fords and Chevys. ... June 14th was the day Washington had its first glimpse of the future
— and everyone not stuck in a car seemed to be smiling.
Harnik suggested five specific projects that would make cycling safer and more enjoyable in Washington:
- A bike lane, the width of one full car lane, on 15th Street, NW from Florida Avenue to I Street.
- Closing the service lanes on K Street except to bicycles and delivery trucks, like European bike boulevards.
- A bike lane on Pennsylvania Avenue from Georgetown to the Sousa Bridge.
- Close Beach Drive in Rock Creek Park and the Arboretum to motor vehicles on Sundays.
- Close the George Washington Parkway and the Baltimore-Washington Parkway for two days a year.
How are we doing with those? The 15th Street bike lane is a hugely successful reality, and now goes farther than Harnik proposed, all the way down to Pennsylvania Avenue where it connects to the Pennsylvania Avenue lane.
The Pennsylvania Avenue lane only goes from the White House to the Capitol, plus the part always closed to traffic and usually open to bikes past the White House itself.
K Street remains a heavily car-centric road. The K Street Transitway plan would improve that, but not really for cyclists. Instead, DDOT is proposing cycle tracks on L and M Streets, but those projects haven't moved forward since Gabe Klein took his cycle track enthusiasm to Chicago.
Beach Drive does close to motor vehicles on Sundays. The Arboretum does not. The GW Parkway does become a bike-only road once a year, for Bike DC; the BW Parkway does not.
In summary, DC went above and beyond on one and partway on three. Harnik wrote when he sent along the article, "Not bad, until you realize it's been 32 years!"
- Successful speed cameras require fair speed limits
- Amid scandal, don't lose sight of Gray's policy achievements
- Montgomery plans 160-mile, "gold standard" BRT system
- VDOT ignores own data, pushes widening I-66
- DC's parks are 5th best in the nation, says "Park Score"
- Bethesda gets new but terrible bike racks
- DC's divide need not be black and white
Greater Washington
District of Columbia




