Posts about Maryland

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.

The bill would make a new and much-needed regional hospital dependent on building the casino, a link that Baker specifically opposes. On the positive side, the bill would dedicate a portion of the gambling profits to the county's economic development incentive fund and education trust fund.

Baker was right to specify National Harbor as preferred choice for a casino

County Executive Baker says the casino should locate at National Harbor, because that picturesque Potomac River site would be a better draw for tourists than Rosecroft Raceway. Also, the existing transportation infrastructure would better support the anticipated traffic, and impose less of a burden on traditionally residential areas.

By making the specific proposal for National Harbor, Baker is attempting to provide some much-needed local perspective and guidance in this brewing debate. Any casino that comes to Prince George's must be "high-end," Baker says. He wants the developer to invest $1 billion in the facility, to ensure it doesn't become a low-grade "slots barn."

State Senate president Thomas "Mike" Miller, whose support for Rosecroft Raceway is well known, rejected Baker's expression of support for National Harbor, and also opposes decoupling the casino from funding the county's new regional hospital.

Regardless of whether one agrees with Baker's decision, it's exactly the type of decisive action that the head of county government should take in this kind of situation. Indeed, this is the very type of action that I recently called for the county to take in its effort to lobby the GSA to relocate the FBI's headquarters to Prince George's.

Just as the county will ultimately be better served by articulating a specific site and vision for any new casino (e.g., National Harbor vs. Rosecroft Raceway; "high-end" vs. "slots barn"), so will it be better served by recommending to the GSA a preferred site for the relocation of the FBI headquarters, like the Morgan Boulevard Metro Station area.

Casino must not receive public subsidies

To ensure that the county wins and doesn't "crap out" on this move to bring Vegas to the Potomac, it must insist that not one penny of public money goes to assist the developers or the property owners at National Harbor in constructing the casino.

No tax-increment financing (TIF) districts, special assessment districts, public bond issues, or tax breaks—nothing. If expensive roadways, overpasses, and parking garages have to be built to accommodate the additional anticipated vehicle traffic, they must be fully funded and guaranteed by the developers.

Additionally, to alleviate the need for at least some of the expensive roadways and parking garages, the developers must be required to contribute a substantial sum to improve the public transit connections to National Harbor.

And no, this does not mean bringing Metro or the Purple Line to National Harbor. That would entail significant amounts of public expense that the county cannot afford right now. Frequent express bus service between National Harbor and one or more of the existing Metro stations should suffice.

This "no public subsidy" stance is important for several reasons. First, regardless of whether it is actually true, the county simply cannot afford the negative perception that this casino project is just the latest in a series of Upper Marlboro- or Annapolis-brokered developer sweetheart deals fueled by corruption, political favoritism, or some other under-the-table influence.

For example, people are already asking whether Sen. Miller's vociferous support for Rosecroft Raceway over National Harbor is the result of an off-the-grid deal between the senator and Penn National Gaming, the organization that recently bought the Rosecroft property out of bankruptcy.

To combat any perception of payoffs, bribery, or any other undue influence, this casino deal needs to be a squeaky-clean, completely above-board process that does not involve government handouts of any variety.

Second, this stance is consistent with the county's stated (albeit rarely followed) policy of incentivizing transit-oriented development and neighborhood revitalization efforts around its 15 Metro stations and in surrounding inner-Beltway communities.

In 2010, the Maryland-National Capital Park and Planning Commission launched a comprehensive, countywide community planning effort called "Envision Prince George's." Among the Envision recommendations (which were subsequently adopted and endorsed by the County Council) was the position that the county should focus 66% of its future growth around its 15 Metro stations and other densely-populated, inner-Beltway corridors.

To ensure that the county meets its TOD goals, Envision recommended that the county "[a]lign public expenditure policies and Capital Improvement Program (CIP) items with the goal of encouraging development in these areas and discouraging further sprawl development in other areas of the County."

Public funding of a National Harbor casino, both far away from a Metro station and outside the Beltway, is simply inconsistent with the county's stated TOD policies.

Third, the casino doesn't need public investment or subsidies. A casino is a natural moneymaker. If you build it, people will come, and they will spend a lot of money. Baker has rightly proposed that, in exchange for building a higher-quality casino, the developers should keep a larger share of the profits than the current 33% provided in state law, and possibly even greater than the 40% proposed by Senator Peters in SB 892.

Prince George's County certainly doesn't need a casino to be economically viable. But having one wouldn't necessarily be the worst thing in the world, either—as long as the county doesn't put any money on the table to get it.

Matt writes,

This article says that the housing markets in Virginia and Maryland are the same, and that the only difference between then is the strength of foreclosure protection laws. I don't believe that is true.

It's my sense that Virginia has more defense contractors and Maryland has more federal government workers. What other characteristics of the housing market are different between the two states?

What do you think might be the reason for the discrepancy?

The yellow-shaded area, directly across Central Avenue from the station, is more than large enough to accommodate the FBI headquarters. The dark purple area, adjacent to the FBI, is ideal for the hospital, while mixed-use offices could occupy the lighter purple areas and mixed-use residential in the brown area. The county could create a pedestrian path with a Main Street character, lined with storefronts, from the station to Central Avenue where employees cross to get to the FBI.

Because it's across a major arterial from the station, the restrictive security constructs would not pose a problem with developing quality mixed-use TOD at the Metro station. Yet, because it is within ½ mile of the Metro station, it would be easily accessible to the thousands of federal employees who would be working at the FBI. Moreover, many of those same employees would have to pass through the station's core commercial area twice a day, thereby creating a natural patron base for any business located there.

Currently, the Morgan Boulevard Station's secondary area is populated with scattered automobile-oriented industrial uses. However, the county could quickly assemble and redevelop that land into a large-acre parcel suitable for the FBI headquarters facility. The existing industrial uses can be easily relocated to one of the many other nearby industrial office parks with vacant space. If there's one thing the county has plenty of (other than developable land around Metro stations), it's vacant industrial space.

Prince George's officials should make a compelling case to the GSA as to why a location like Morgan Boulevard would be a win-win for the federal government as well as the county and state governments, and specifically why it would be better than the GSA-owned property at Franconia-Springfield Metro Station in Fairfax County. Here are a few suggestions:

Morgan Boulevard is closer to DC. It is 9.5 miles from the DC core, while Franconia-Springfield is 15 miles from downtown. It is also inside the Beltway, while being equally as accessible via Metro's Blue Line.

It is one of the least-utilized Metro stations. In fact, in 2007, Morgan Boulevard had the fewest weekday riders of any Metro station. Unlike the Franconia-Springfield Station, a busy transit terminus in already-overcrowded Fairfax County, Morgan Boulevard could easily accommodate the influx of thousands of additional riders a day.

Ample roadway capacity already exists. Unlike the Beltway area around Franconia-Springfield, the roadways around Morgan Boulevard are able to accommodate the workers who would choose to drive to work. The same multiple paths that allow many thousands of fans to drive to FedEx Field for Redskins games would also accommodate the substantially fewer number of federal workers that would be driving to the new FBI headquarters during the work week. And the use of the same reversible lane technologies employed on game day should assist with traffic flow during the work week.

It would bring more parity to the region. From a policy standpoint, bringing the FBI headquarters to Morgan Boulevard would allow the federal government to better equalize the regional distribution of federal employment sites. Prince George's supplies more than a quarter of the region's federal workforce and is entitled to a fairer allocation of the job sites.

The area is comparatively less well-off economically. Unlike wealthy Fairfax County, the surrounding inner-Beltway community near this station is one that could more greatly benefit from urban revitalization, thus allowing the federal investment to accomplish multiple goals.

These are the type of specific, fact-based arguments and actions (among others) that will make a worthy case to the GSA for why it should bring the FBI headquarters to Prince George's County.

Make a specific site recommendation. Give specific justifications. Articulate a sensible TOD and neighborhood revitalization strategy. Provide quick, responsible, and decisive action by local officials.

Prince George's County deserves to attract the FBI headquarters and other large federal government offices. If it wants to do so, though, it needs to step up its game dramatically.

Talk of relocating the FBI has been brewing since at least 2010, when Senator Barbara Mikulski (D-MD) obtained funding for a study on that question. The Government Accountability Office issued a report to Congress on November 8, 2011, stating that relocating the FBI headquarters from the J. Edgar Hoover Building in DC to another transit-accessible location in the region was both the cheapest and quickest option to allow the FBI to consolidate its workforce and maintain operational security.

One month later, on December 8, 2011, the Senate Environmental and Public Works Committee authorized the General Services Administration to move forward with finding a site for a new FBI headquarters. The committee required that the new headquarters occupy federally-owned land within 2 miles of a Metro station and within 2½ miles of the Capital Beltway, among other requirements.

Within a month, Fairfax made a specific pitch for a specific and highly competitive location that meets the requirements in the Senate EPW Committee's resolution.

By comparison, Prince George's resolution is rather amorphous. It provides that the county government has "strong support for relocating the FBI and other Federal agencies and acquiring other Federal leased space in Prince George's County" and "is prepared to be a partner with the GSA and the private sector in utilizing appropriate economic incentives, to facilitate the location or relocation of Federal agencies to Prince George's County, Maryland."

Okay, great. What county government wouldn't want a huge federal agency, with all its employees, coming to town?

The resolution also highlights that Prince George's has historically gotten the short end of the stick when it comes to federal employment sites. Though more than 25% of the federal employees in the National Capital region reside in Prince George's, the county has only 5% of the region's federal office space. Certainly true enough and worth pointing out.

But exactly where does the county want the facility to go? How would the GSA and the federal government benefit from locating the FBI headquarters in Prince George's rather than Fairfax or any other neighboring jurisdiction? The county's apparent answer thus far: we don't know yet.

The county's unfocused approach doesn't prioritize Metro station development

The County Executive's press release announced the formation of "an inter-agency task force that will regularly meet and analyze possible sites in the County that are in accordance to" the GSA and Senate EPW Committee specifications. That sounds like an excruciatingly long, bureaucratic nightmare of a process, especially given that Fairfax County is already bringing specific proposals to the table.

Time and time again, the ubiquitous "task force" is where many worthy proposals are sent to die a slow and painful death.

Prince George's formation of such a task force at this late date raises a more significant and troubling question: Why hasn't the county already done that basic site analysis groundwork if the idea of relocating the FBI's headquarters has been floating around since 2010?

The answer is simple, and probably best explains why the county doesn't already have more of its fair share of large employers (federal or otherwise), quality retail destinations, and attractive housing choices around its Metro stations. Despite all of its lofty pronouncements over several administrations, the county simply hasn't taken enough tangible action to prioritize Metro station development and revitalization of its existing, transit-rich urban core inside the Beltway.

Moreover, as I wrote recently, the county unfortunately often actively undermines its own stated transit-oriented development goals by advancing massive mixed-use projects that are too far away from existing Metro stations, thereby reducing the market for similar development at the Metro stations.

That's why in 2007, for example, we saw an elaborate master plan being developed for Westphalia, a sprawling greenfield development on rural farmland located outside of the Beltway and far from a Metro station.

Westphalia was the brainchild of former county executives Jack Johnson and Jim Estepp; former District 6 county councilman Samuel Dean; and two corrupt crony developers, Patrick Ricker and Daniel Colton. Johnson, Ricker, and Colton have all now pled guilty to federal corruption and bribery changes and are heading to prison.

Despite the ignominious legacy of corruption and misguided policy that underlies Westphalia, the Baker administration apparently remains committed to bringing the suburban sprawl project to fruition, even while claiming that "one of [its] top priorities will be maximizing the potential at our Metro stations." Baker's spokesperson, Scott Peterson, said in June 2011, "[T]he [Westphalia] development is important to the residents of the community and the county, and we'll be working hard to keep the project on line."

At the same time it develops and actively pursues detailed proposals for suburban sprawl developments like Westphalia and Woodmore Towne Center, the county lacks a coherent strategy for developing the four largely vacant Metro stations along its Blue Line corridor (Capitol Heights, Addison Road, Morgan Boulevard, and Largo Town Center), or the three stations along its Orange Line corridor (Cheverly, Landover, and New Carrollton).

Only recently has the county begun to turn its attention to those station areas, with such efforts as the Blue Line Corridor TOD Strategy Implementation Project and the New Carrollton Transit District Development Plan.

Richard Layman aptly captured Prince George's Metro station TOD dilemma in a comment to a previous post: "[M]ostly, developers won't be choosing to do speculative development in most of [Prince George's County], including at Metro stations[,] without superlative station plans and great incentive packages anytime soon." Richard's comment rings true both for private developers and for public ones, like the GSA.

County should make detailed proposals for specific Metro sites, and soon

Fortunately for Prince George's, its past history of poor focus on Metro station TOD does not have to constrain its future course. The Baker administration and the current County Council are much better equipped and, by and large, more willing to embrace and pursue true TOD than Jack Johnson & Crew. But if they're going to do so, they need to adjust their thinking and sharpen their focus, so that the county's actions match its policy goals.

The task of identifying suitable space for the FBI headquarters building does not have to be made that difficult and should not entail endless deliberation by an ad hoc task force. The county already has a stated policy that assigns "top priority" to transit-oriented development around Metro stations.

This county policy priority also comports with the GSA requirement for the new FBI headquarters site to be located within 2 miles of a Metro station. So the first decision point in the selection process should be clear: locate and recommend an available site near a Metro station if at all possible.

By my count, there are only 5 Metro stations in Prince George's County that are within 2½ miles of the Beltway: Branch Avenue, Largo Town Center, Morgan Boulevard, New Carrollton, and Greenbelt. The goal should be to find a suitable site around one of those 5 stations. Within a span of a few hours, anyone working with the county's GIS mapping system and Google Earth should be able to identify which of those 5 locations has the 55 acres of developable or re-developable land the FBI needs.

Matt Johnson argued several weeks ago that putting a high-security fortress like the FBI headquarters directly on top of a Metro station site was not ideal, because such a complex would not be conducive to creating the type of walkable, open, and public environment that should define TOD at a Metro station.

He suggested a couple of alternate greenfield sites near the federal courthouse in Greenbelt, which is about a mile away from the Greenbelt Metro station. However, it appears that one of those sites is not large enough to meet the GSA requirements, and the other site is already committed for another use.

Ideally, the best location for the new FBI building would be in the "secondary area" of a Metro station. In his book The Next American Metropolis, famed architect and urban planner Peter Calthorpe explains that the secondary area of a transit station area is located within a mile of the station, often across a major arterial street.

The secondary area is an appropriate location for uses that should ordinarily not be located in the principal commercial core of a transit area, like lower-density single-family homes, automobile-oriented uses like gas stations and repair shops, and large employment-generating uses that may not fit within the compact, walkable block structure that is essential for proper pedestrian circulation in a TOD—such as a 55-acre FBI headquarters campus that requires a massive security moat around it.

Tomorrow, I'll suggest the ideal site in Prince George's County for the FBI headquarters, one that's large enough, meets the Senate committee's requirements, and lies within the secondary area of a Metro station.

This committee voted 3-2 in support. Unfortunately, a bill needs 4 votes to earn a "favorable" rating from the committee—and that is how it "lost." But the committee can reconsider the bill if it wants, or the full county delegation of 24 delegates can take up the bill without a favorable report from the committee. If it's going to move forward any further, though, residents of Prince George's County need to contact their delegates now.

The plastics industry is paying for hundreds of robocalls, giving legislators the impression that there is strong public opposition. Supportive county residents and workers need to call and email and have their voices heard.

All Prince George's delegates are important, but one particularly important vote is Delegate Veronica Turner (District 26). She is a member of the County Affairs Committee, but was absent the day of the vote.

As DC has seen over the last 2 years, making the cost of single-use bags transparent by charging a nickel for them is a powerful motivator to switch to reusable bags. Three-quarters of DC residents say they have reduced their use of plastic bags, and businesses large and small have saved thousands of dollars by not having to buy as many bags.

Volunteers are picking up fewer bags during river cleanups, and grant money is flowing to green businesses and nonprofit organizations (including mine) that work to restore the Anacostia River, creating jobs. Low-income residents have received thousands of free reusable bags.

DC Councilmember Tommy Wells authored the bag fee as a step toward removing trash from the Anacostia River. But 50% of the river's watershed is in Prince George's County, making county the most important piece of the restoration puzzle.

Prince George's County spends $2.5 million each year picking up litter, and with new limits on trash pollution in the Anacostia River, the public expense is only going to go up. Shoppers pay more for food and other products because retailers add the cost of those "free" bags to prices—as much as $37.50 per year for the average shopper. There is no such thing as a free bag.

Finally, it's a matter of home rule. The County Council voted 8-0, with one abstention, to endorse PG 402-12. County Executive Rushern Baker has taken this campaign on as a personal project. If county leaders want to proactively address an environmental problem, why should the General Assembly interfere?

At the head of the river in Maryland, over a dozen crew teams from the region call Bladensburg Waterfront Park home, including University of Maryland, Catholic University, Elizabeth Seton High School, DeMatha Catholic High School, and Walter Johnson High School. You can even learn to row with the Washington Rowing School, rent a canoe or paddle boat from Prince George's County Department of Parks and Recreation, or take a guided river tour with AWS.

This park is also the gateway to the Anacostia Tributary Trail System, a biker's paradise of trails stretching up to Greenbelt and Wheaton that within 2 years will connect southward along the river to the existing Anacostia Riverwalk Trail in the District.

The Anacostia River has a rich history of recreational use. Eastern Power Boat Club, founded in 1905, is the country's first power boat club, and Seafarer's Yacht Club, founded in 1945, is the oldest African-American yacht club on the east coast. Seafarer's has a long commitment to community service and the health of the river, starting the annual Anacostia River clean up that has grown into a major annual Earth Day event, and AWS is a proud partner.

Other members of the Historic Anacostia Boating Association are also along Boathouse Row (Water and M Streets SE), including District Yacht Club and Washington Yacht Club, as well as the Anacostia Community Boathouse, a home for rowers and recreational paddlers.

AWS is a founding member of the Anacostia Community Boathouse Association, and with ACBA's excellent new facilities at 1900 M Street SE, AWS has begun to increase our recreational paddling programs. In 2011, AWS "Paddle Nights" attracted several dozen people down to the river every 2 weeks and opened their eyes to the possibilities of a clean, healthy Anacostia River.

If you don't know about something, it is hard to care about it. In short, recreation equals stewardship, and we believe that more citizens should come to know and love the Anacostia River.

In light of AWS activities to clean up the river, we are often asked if it is safe to recreate on the Anacostia River. The answer is yes, if you are sensible about it. Don't swim, don't drink the water, and be careful about eating the fish. But please walk, bike, row, paddle, or simply look at and enjoy the river.

In order to share this information more widely, AWS and ACBA are hosting a River Health and Public Recreation Forum this Saturday, February 11, 9-11 am, at the First District Police Station, 101 M Street SW.

Councilmember Tommy Wells, Dr. Janet Phoenix of the DC Environmental Health Collaborative, Dr. Sacoby Wilson of the University of Maryland, Collin Burrell of the District Department of Environment, and Donal Barron of DC Water will give a brief panel presentation, followed by an audience Q&A. Topics will range from recreational safety to the risks posed by the river's various pollution sources, including bacteria, stormwater, toxics, and trash.

Although we've still got a ways to go to reach our goal of a swimmable and fishable Anacostia River, it is already a community asset for those who know its charms. Come down to the river and learn for yourself what many locals already know: the Anacostia is an urban oasis, and could yet be a better one if we have the willpower to make it happen. This well-kept secret is really a hidden gem.