Nancy Floreen - Greater Greater Washington

MoCo CaBi coming; Floreen wants lanes

Thu, 25 Apr 2013 08:37:00 EDT

Montgomery County signed a contract with Alta to bring Capital Bikeshare there by this fall. Nancy Floreen says the county needs to do more to add bike lanes in Bethesda and Silver Spring. (WTOP)

Comment

Bag fee for fewer stores?

Wed, 24 Apr 2013 08:15:00 EDT

by Nick Casey

4 Montgomery councilmembers want to narrow the year-old bag fee to only affect stores that sell food (like DC's law). Council staff and the Department of Environmental Protection want the law to stay. (Examiner)

Comment

12 Councilmembers co-introduce 5-cent fee for disposable bags (Feb 17, 2009)
Montgomery County underestimated plastic bag use (Feb 5, 2013)
Montgomery groups attack 270 widening, criticize "false choice" (Jul 20, 2009)
Montgomery councilmembers: Get moving on bus priority (Apr 22, 2011)
Hear from the District 4 candidates (Mar 16, 2009)

Door freely, wear a helmet

Wed, 13 Feb 2013 08:46:00 EDT

by David Alpert

Bike advocates testified against the Maryland helmet bill, while Nancy Floreen argued for it. Meanwhile, Chap Petersen's anti-dooring bill failed on a tie vote in a Virginia house committee. (Baltimore Sun, WashCycle)

Comment

Small steps can help bicycling in Virginia (Jan 4, 2013)
McDonnell trying again to take WMATA seat from NoVA (Mar 31, 2011)
Maryland helmet law would make cyclists less safe (Feb 11, 2013)
What killed the Prince George's County bag bill? (Mar 27, 2012)
COG climate change report briefing tomorrow (Aug 25, 2008)

Capital Bikeshare needs more bike lanes to work in MoCo

Fri, 14 Dec 2012 13:28:00 EDT

by Dan Reed

Capital Bikeshare will expand into Montgomery County next year, but bicycling advocates say the infrastructure isn't ready for it. If the county's serious about making bikeshare work, they need to make bicycling safe and comfortable as soon as the first bikes are out.

Rendering of bike lanes on Second Avenue by Dan Reed.

This week, the Washington Area Bicyclist Association and MoBike recommended that almost 20 miles of bike paths should be built inside the Beltway ~~before bikeshare opens~~.

Bicycling has become more popular as a form of transportation in Montgomery County in recent years, but there are very few bike lanes, and the county's wide, busy roads deter all except the most fearless cyclists. As a result, bikeshare users might be tempted to ride on the sidewalk, which could be dangerous for pedestrians.

Proposed Montgomery County bike lanes. Blue represents bike lanes and separated paths, while orange represents sharrows. Click for interactive version.

In this report, the two groups suggest a network of bike lanes in Silver Spring, Takoma Park, Bethesda and Friendship Heights. They proposed having dedicated bike lanes on major roads like Georgia Avenue in Silver Spring and business district streets like Arlington Road in Bethesda.

Streets that were too narrow or too congested for bike lanes, like Elm Street in Bethesda, would get sharrows, which help drivers and cyclists share the road.

They also asked the county to complete major regional trails, like the Metropolitan Branch Trail, which currently stops half a mile short of its proposed terminus at the Silver Spring Metro station.

The proposed lanes make a lot of sense, focusing on compact downcounty neighborhoods where everything's already within biking distance. I've written before that more on-street bike routes can make bicycling more practical as a form of transportation by bringing riders to shops, jobs and other activities. And bikes take up a lot less space than cars, meaning we can fit more bicyclists on a congested street than we can drivers.

Some of the proposed routes, like Georgia Avenue and Colesville Road, may face resistance from the Montgomery County Department of Transportation and the State Highway Administration, which have been reluctant to take away space from cars. But WABA and MoBike weren't the first to propose bike lanes for them: earlier this year, County Councilmember Nancy Floreen asked that the state paint lanes on several major roads that they're scheduled to repave anyway next year.

Creating a countywide bicycling network will take a lot of time and planning, but there are things we can do to improve the biking experience sooner rather than later. As more people take up bicycling, they may find that they don't have safe places to ride. As a result, Capital Bikeshare could help build a constituency for bike lanes that doesn't exist now.

Capital Bikeshare is ready to expand into Montgomery County. The question is whether our streets will be ready for Capital Bikeshare.

51 comments

Where do MoCo residents walk, bike & take transit to work? (Dec 17, 2012)
Study says bike lanes really work (Oct 20, 2008)
Montgomery's fake cul-de-sacs don't solve traffic woes (Jul 31, 2012)
Montgomery hopes to add 50 Capital Bikeshare stations (Dec 1, 2011)
Hyattsville is a prime candidate for Capital Bikeshare (Oct 13, 2011)

Traffic tests confound Montgomery council

Wed, 10 Oct 2012 11:46:00 EDT

by Ben Ross

Montgomery County has tried several times to find a working "adequate public facilities ordinance," rules that aim to ensure new buildings don't jam up roads. They've never succeeded, and a new version won't either.

Photo by Google Earth.

At a County Council meeting Monday, legislators struggled with another proposed revamp of the law, which the county DOT originated and the Planning Board endorsed with some changes. This version would junk rules the county adopted 5 years ago, which supplanted a law from 2003, which replaced yet another system of regulation that preceded it.

None of these rules got rid of traffic jams because all share the same fundamental flaw. They measure how fast cars move, rather than whether people can get where they want to go. If the supermarket is 10 miles away, and it takes 15 minutes to drive there, you pass the test. If the supermarket is 1 mile away, and it takes 5 minutes to drive there, you flunk.

There are 2 ways to get new construction approved under this sort of test. One is to locate the building far from everything else. The other is to build new highways or widen old ones. This is a recipe for more sprawl, more asphalt, and more driving. Rather than relieving traffic congestion, it makes more of it.

The proposal now before the Council, called Transportation Policy Area Review or "TPAR," doubles down on this failed strategy. It would create a new pot of money, collected from developers who build in areas with congested roads, under the control of the county's car-centric, highway-loving Transportation Department. In addition, the proposal would still require developers to widen nearby roads if intersections back up.

Edgar Gonzalez, the department's number two, told Councilmember Hans Riemer that passing the legislation would commit the county to a long list of controversial road projects, especially the hotly-disputed Midcounty Highway extension. The legislators were divided Monday over whether they should tie their hands in this way.

Riemer and George Leventhal argued that the County Council should retain flexibility in making spending decisions. Nancy Floreen, on the other hand, insisted that money from the road congestion tax should only be spent to move cars. She pointed to a bicycle bridge over Veirs Mill Road, funded under the current law, as a misuse of funds.

Marc Elrich, who has long considered "free-flowing" automobile traffic a paramount objective, initially agreed, saying he was "sort of where Nancy is on certainty of where money is spent." Elrich later backtracked somewhat, saying that improved transit could be a better way to keep cars moving than new highways, but he reiterated his belief that sidewalks and bus shelters should not substitute for road-building.

A companion tax on developers that would fund added Ride-On bus service is also before the council. Sharp questioning from Roger Berliner established that this tax would not, as claimed, put autos and transit on an equal footing.

Gonzalez and Planning Board chair Françoise Carrier conceded that the level of transit service the proposal defines as "adequate"—a bus every 20 minutes in rush hour and every half hour the rest of the day—is nowhere near good enough to compete with driving. It is simply what is achievable without straining the county budget.

The debate over who should determine spending priorities comes just months after the Council overruled the Transportation Department and deferred 3 highway projects to pay for a new Bethesda Metro entrance and a bike trail. Since then, the county bureaucracy has done little to gain public confidence. The debacles of the Silver Spring Transit Center and the Woodmont Avenue road closing in Bethesda suggest that now is not the time for legislators to lessen their oversight.

12 comments

For Montgomery County Council (Aug 31, 2010)
Montgomery councilmembers: Get moving on bus priority (Apr 22, 2011)
Montgomery DOT rolls out another cars-first traffic test (Apr 28, 2010)
Montgomery builds BRT-hostile roads as it plans BRT (Nov 15, 2012)
The only thing we have to fear is fear of traffic (Jan 13, 2010)

And...

Tue, 09 Oct 2012 08:38:00 EDT

by Thaddeus Bell

Anti-Muslim ads have been installed in 4 Metro stations. (WAMU) ... A Fairfax woman builds a 210-square foot mobile home. (Post) ... Montgomery Councilmember Nancy Floreen wants bike lanes on 16 roads up for resurfacing soon. (Examiner)

Comment

DDOT piloting credit card meters (Jan 20, 2010)

Bethesda second entrance lives

Tue, 14 Feb 2012 08:02:00 EDT

by David Alpert

A Montgomery County Council committee voted to restore funding for the Bethesda Metro second entrance, delaying it just one year instead of indefinitely as in County Executive Leggett's budget. Roger Berliner and Hans Riemer voted for the change, while Nancy Floreen abstained. (Post, Examiner)

Comment

Montgomery councilmembers: Get moving on bus priority (Apr 22, 2011)
For Montgomery County Council (Aug 31, 2010)
Floreen: Rockville works fine without LOS rule (Jan 21, 2010)
Floreen, Berliner vote to continue the cycle of sprawl and pollution (Jul 17, 2009)
Time to fast-track the southern Bethesda Metro entrance (Nov 2, 2010)

Streetcar to Silver Spring?

Fri, 18 Nov 2011 07:57:00 EDT

by David Alpert

Montgomery Councilmembers Nancy Floreen and Hans Riemer are asking DC to consider running the streetcar to Silver Spring. It's entirely logical, if only the various DOTs can work together. (South Silver Spring)

Comment

Silver Spring library skybridge rejected (Jul 22, 2009)
Montgomery councilmembers: Get moving on bus priority (Apr 22, 2011)
Hans Riemer discusses Smart Growth at campaign kickoff (Feb 24, 2010)
For Montgomery County Council (Aug 31, 2010)
Congratulations Hans, Vince, Phil, Tommy, Mel and others (Sep 15, 2010)

Bag fees, Bethesda to Burtonsville

Wed, 04 May 2011 08:26:00 EDT

by David Alpert

Montgomery County has passed a 5¢ bag fee. Unlike DC's, it applies to all retail, not just food sales. Nancy Floreen (at-large) was the only dissenter. (Post)

Comment

Floreen: Rockville works fine without LOS rule (Jan 21, 2010)
Floreen floats parking tax proposal (Sep 10, 2008)
Floreen shocked by tolls on project she supported (Dec 24, 2009)
MoCoCo picks developer over transit-oriented activist (Jun 26, 2008)
Montgomery considering Bethesda parking rate increase (Apr 20, 2009)

Montgomery councilmembers: Get moving on bus priority

Fri, 22 Apr 2011 13:19:00 EDT

by David Alpert

Four members of the Montgomery County Council asked county officials to stop dragging their feet on bus priority, and implement or at least evaluate some fixes as soon as possible.

Photo by icantcu on Flickr.

In a recent letter, they praise the Montgomery County Department of Transportation (MCDOT)'s work on Ride On, but criticize its unwillingness to pursue bus priority in the short term.

They ask MCDOT to work with state officials and WMATA to find high priority intersections ripe for signal priority or queue jumper lanes that would help buses avoid delays in traffic.

WMATA has been promoting ideas around bus priority for a number of years now. Quite simply, buses spend a fair amount of time in traffic, and that time costs a lot of money. Some of the growth in operating costs comes from more time in traffic. If buses can move more efficiently, it saves on costs and also improves the bus ride for everyone.

Traditional traffic engineering measures intersections and roads based on numbers of vehicles. If changing a signal timing would let more vehicles traverse the intersection, classic traffic engineering says make the change. But we really should be counting people. If one bus has 50 people and a change would help it move faster than 20 cars, giving the bus priority is the right move.

Montgomery County's DOT, notoriously one of the least progressive in the region, has been resistant to this thinking. When activists suggested a few intersections for signal timing, signal priority, or queue jumper lanes, MCDOT pooh-poohed them all but didn't suggest any alternatives of their own.

At a recent county council hearing on transit, MCDOT officials said that any of these fixes would "have to wait" until the county implements a comprehensive Bus Rapid Transit system, like the one being pushed by Councilmember Marc Elrich.

The council disagrees. In a letter to MCDOT and WMATA officials, councilmembers Hans Riemer and Nancy Floreen (at-large), council president Valerie Ervin (district 5, Silver Spring/Takoma Park), and Transportation, Energy, Infrastructure & Environment committee chair Roger Berliner (district 1, Bethesda/Potomac/Chevy Chase) asked MCDOT in effect to get off its butt and start doing something.

They ask MCDOT, Maryland State Highway Administration, and WMATA to generate a list of the highest priority intersections for bus priority fixes, to evaluate the possibility of changes, release that information publicly in a way that residents can review, and to generate a policy to guide such changes.

Kudos to the council for stepping up on this issue. Montgomery County is often one of the most progressive counties on many policies, but its transportation officials need some prodding to pursue solutions beyond just focusing on moving cars. They should take this letter to heart and get their staff, and the buses, moving.

6 comments

Maryland on priority corridors: Great! Montgomery: Nah! (Feb 19, 2010)
For buses, faster is cheaper (Aug 12, 2009)
Leggett doesn't agree with his own DOT? (Jul 26, 2010)
What does a highway guy think about priority bus corridors? (Dec 3, 2008)
Jurisdictions should contribute in dollars or bus priorities (Dec 3, 2009)

Floreen vs. the bag fee

Tue, 22 Mar 2011 10:04:00 EDT

by David Alpert

Montgomery Councilmember Nancy Floreen comes out against a 5¢ bag fee, saying it's a "nickel and diming" waste of time if it won't clean up the Chesapeake all on its own; Keith Berner says it'll make a positive impact and the Council spends plenty of time on more frivolous topics. (Post)

Comment

Floreen: Rockville works fine without LOS rule (Jan 21, 2010)
Floreen floats parking tax proposal (Sep 10, 2008)
Floreen shocked by tolls on project she supported (Dec 24, 2009)
Floreen, Berliner vote to continue the cycle of sprawl and pollution (Jul 17, 2009)
Silver Spring library skybridge rejected (Jul 22, 2009)

Can we eliminate death and serious injury from roadways?

Tue, 16 Nov 2010 14:27:00 EDT

by Stephen Miller

After nine passengers died on the Red Line in 2009, we didn't throw up our hands and chalk it up to issues beyond our control. Instead, the region has seen serious debate and action—however imperfect—to ensure that no one is killed or seriously injured while riding Metro.

Photo by Kecko on Flickr.

Why, then, do we take a more defeatist attitude toward the safety of our roadways? Why do our elected officials insist that there's no way to free our roadways of death and serious injury, while sparing no expense or energy on air travel or rail safety measures?

A nation with one of the world's lowest rates of roadway death and injury offers a different vision. It should challenge us to ask some difficult questions and examine the expectations we have of our road system.

Sweden, long known for its excellent road safety record, has led the way in creating a new paradigm for addressing this persistent public health problem. In 1997, the Swedish Parliament adopted the "Vision Zero" policy, which sets a goal of reducing roadway fatalities and serious injuries to zero.

While there will continue to be crashes on Swedish roadways resulting in recoverable injury, the underlying philosophy of Vision Zero rests on an ethical understanding that death and lifelong suffering from severe injury are not acceptable byproducts of our transportation system.

We accept this ethical standard for our freight rail, mass transit and air travel systems but each day, our roadway system gets a pass on unnecessary tragedy. Most crashes resulting in death or serious injury, involving all types of road users, are caused not by willful negligence on the part of the road user. They often involve everyday people on roads that put them at unnecessary risk.

It doesn't have to be this way. A generation ago, we recognized the role of vehicle safety and created a vehicle-based safety culture focused on seat belts, air bags, and anti-lock brakes. The safety culture then broadened to include operator behavior, with a focus on drunk driving, road rage, and distracted driving. It's time to systematically include roadway design in our safety culture.

At a Montgomery County Council transportation subcommittee hearing last month, council member Marc Elrich argued that the number of roadway deaths could never be reduced to zero.

"People will die as long as they do stupid stuff," Erlich said. "You can't make this world so safe that no one can be harmed."

In a follow-up, Elrich aide Dale Tibbitts added, "Of course we wish to make environment safe for everyone," listing various pedestrian safety initiatives in the county. "Despite all these efforts," he argued, "if a driver, a pedestrian or a bicyclist acts negligently, the County cannot prevent every tragic incident." Tibbitts continued, "When the police report to us that a person dressed in dark clothing stepped out in Georgia Ave on a dark night and was struck by a car traveling 35-40 mph and was killed, that is beyond the scope of what the Council can legislate and fund."

The "Vision Zero" philosophy does not envision a magical world where nothing bad happens on our roadways. Crashes will continue to happen. Suicides and reckless behavior will always lead to tragedy. But there are thousands of deaths and serious injuries each year caused not by reckless behavior but by a system that is dangerous by design, where pedestrians have to walk unreasonable distances to a safe crossing along high-speed roadways through populated areas.

At present, road users are operating within a system that encourages speeding, especially along corridors such as Georgia Avenue. As council member Nancy Floreen noted at the same meeting, "We should give greater thought to our design standards. Who's winning the speed battle? Shouldn't we do all we can to allow the pedestrians more respect than our systems currently allow?" This philosophy balances responsibility on two parties: roadway users and roadway designers.

The defeatist attitude that death and serious injury will always happen on our streets has become the conventional wisdom for our roadways, but not for our railways, airways or transit systems. We wouldn't be complacent if thousands of Americans died each year on our nation's subways or airplanes, but that's exactly what happens on our roads.

When it comes to preventing death and serious injury, we too often focus on individual behavior and vehicle safety but ignore the crucial role of roadway design, which leads to one of the deadliest ingredients in any crash: speed. Road design changes, such as traffic calming, have proven effective at improving road safety.

Most roadway deaths and serious injuries are preventable. Why have we convinced ourselves that they are not?

Cross-posted at Struck in DC.

28 comments

MoCoCo agrees with Planning Board on Road Code (Oct 7, 2008)
Outrage against enforcement is unsafe at any speed (Sep 22, 2009)
MoCo road code, AAA oppose tree-lined medians (Oct 1, 2008)
The hazards of driving: Michael Phelps and you (Aug 18, 2009)
Mean Streets: Hit-and-run becomes kill-and-run (Sep 16, 2009)

MoCo Council on pedestrian safety

Fri, 22 Oct 2010 08:28:00 EDT

by David Alpert

Montgomery Council chair Nancy Floreen says the county should do better on pedestrian safety, while fellow at-large member Marc Elrich said not all fatalities "are avoidable." (TBD)

Comment

Floreen: Rockville works fine without LOS rule (Jan 21, 2010)
For Montgomery County Council (Aug 31, 2010)
MoCoCo agrees with Planning Board on Road Code (Oct 7, 2008)
Floreen, Berliner vote to continue the cycle of sprawl and pollution (Jul 17, 2009)
MoCoCo picks developer over transit-oriented activist (Jun 26, 2008)

For Montgomery County Council

Tue, 31 Aug 2010 11:36:00 EDT

by David Alpert

I've found the Montgomery County Council frustrating. On important issues around growth, development and transportation, many councilmembers don't take much of a stand and vote in unanimous or near-unanimous numbers even on controversial and vital issues.

Many seem to prefer finding a consensus where they can vote unanimously or nearly-unanimously, regardless of the merits of that consensus. The I-270 battle was a good case in point, where advocates' opposition to SHA's plan got the Council to postpone a vote, then meet for a work session to agree on a compromise, which passed unanimously. As a result, most members avoided ever having to really stick up for or against something.

The County Council needs a strong advocate for Smart Growth and sustainable transportation issues. That would likely be Hans Riemer, if he is successful in his bid for one of the four at-large seats. Hans is a longtime Smart Growth proponent and an active member of ACT. He set out clear and excellent positions in his interview with Cavan.

The four incumbents are all definitely superior to the rest of the challengers besides Riemer. Those incumbents each have their pros and cons.

Marc Elrich has been a strong proponent of a Bus Rapid Transit network, pushing the idea tirelessly and making it a signature issue. However, he's also the strongest defender of traffic-based tests that in effect hinder walkable development.

Nancy Floreen pushed through the White Flint plan, one of Montgomery's biggest opportunities for meaningful transit-oriented development, and opposes the traffic-based tests that Elrich likes. On the other hand, she also opposes most rules that would limit development in rural areas far from transit. She generally advocates building in the county and is less discerning about what or where.

George Leventhal has been a leader in the fight for the Purple Line, and for transit in general in the county. Yet he also strongly supported widening I-270, and basically favors any transportation project of any kind in any location. Duchy Trachtenberg has been good on the environment and transit issues as well and not a road booster, but hasn't shown as much leadership on growth and transportation issues generally.

I'd recommend Montgomery residents (like my in-laws) vote for Mr. Riemer and decide among the other candidates based on the other issues, like schools, budgets, labor relations and many more. If you're not sure of some of the candidates, it's also fine to vote for only two or three. Leaving a blank or two on the ballot makes the votes you do cast count even more, as the top four total vote-getters win the seats.

Two district seats are also contested, which happen to be the two that had Montgomery's greatest development debates in the last few years. District 1 includes Chevy Chase, Bethesda and Potomac, and has significant numbers of residents who oppose the Purple Line and/or White Flint. Roger Berliner, the incumbent, has championed both projects a good future for his area despite the short-term political risk. Meanwhile, his challenger, Ilaya Hopkins, has chosen to throw her lot in with the antis. Mr. Berliner should be reelected to prove that anti sentiment doesn't drive Montgomery politics.

In District 2, the suburban and rural northern part of the County, former Planning Board Chair Royce Hanson is the best choice for the open seat. He's been a strong proponent of Smart Growth on the Planning Board, and was largely responsible for the Agricultural Reserve, the large belt of (mostly) protected land at the County's edge, much of which is in that district. His support for the sprawl development at Gaithersburg West was more of a disappointment, but his multi-decade track record warrants your vote.

The other district members, Phil Andrews, Nancy Navarro, and Valerie Ervin, do not have primary challengers.

18 comments

Congratulations Hans, Vince, Phil, Tommy, Mel and others (Sep 15, 2010)
Floreen: Rockville works fine without LOS rule (Jan 21, 2010)
For state legislature in Montgomery County (Sep 1, 2010)
MoCoCo picks developer over transit-oriented activist (Jun 26, 2008)
ACT produces District 4 scorecard (Apr 15, 2009)

Riemer only endorsed challenger

Mon, 12 Jul 2010 08:38:00 EDT

by David Alpert

The Post made endorsements for Montgomery County Council primaries, recommending Smart Growth candidate Hans Riemer and three incumbents at-large (Trachtenberg, Elrich and Floreen). They also endorsed Roger Berliner for reelection and Royce Hanson for the upcounty open seat.

Comment

Floreen: Rockville works fine without LOS rule

Thu, 21 Jan 2010 12:55:00 EDT

by David Alpert

Montgomery Council Chair Nancy Floreen (at-large) argued passionately at a hearing Tuesday for relaxing the "adequate public facilities" rules that are standing in the way of walkable development at White Flint that has widespread community support.

Rockville exists even without LOS rules. Photo by thisisbossi.

I wrote about the absurity of clinging to a traffic model that says communities cannot function without wider roads, when our cities such as DC are living examples to the contrary. Floreen pointed out another such example: Rockville.

"Is the City of Rockville in balance?" Floreen said. "It doesn't use this test and it's a neighbor of Whtie Flint. Why let 9 Council members define this? ... We're using the wrong standards."

Barnaby Zall said that 30 seconds is what stands in the way of the County approving White Flint. The County Executive wants to prioritize the speed of traffic through White Flint above creating a great place there, and County Council staff were unable to make the plan work with the existing, broken metrics.

In this particular case, many people in the community support the plan. And for many Councilmembers, including Floreen, that makes a big difference.

Floreen said (as transcribed by FLOG:

I love the White Flint Plan. Because the community defined what it wanted and said the community character is what matters most. I have come to say that's how you should find out what matters.
I will lie down in the middle of Rockville Pike if you make the intersection at Strathmore any bigger. People can't walk across Strathmore because of the speeds drivers think they're entitled to. ...
We're letting the wrong standards drive us. I can't explain the difference between 30 seconds and 40. People who live within WF want to see some real improvements.

Based on comments, Councilmember Marc Elrich (at-large) seemed most hesitant to change the rules, while Councilmember Roger Berliner (District 1, which include the area) and Duchy Trachtenberg (at-large) support approving the White Flint plan.

1 comment

For Montgomery County Council (Aug 31, 2010)
Floreen, Berliner vote to continue the cycle of sprawl and pollution (Jul 17, 2009)
Will 30 seconds kill White Flint? (Jan 18, 2010)
Montgomery Council agrees on 270 widening, debates BRT versus light rail (Nov 10, 2009)
MoCoCo picks developer over transit-oriented activist (Jun 26, 2008)

Floreen shocked by tolls on project she supported

Thu, 24 Dec 2009 10:41:00 EDT

by David Alpert

Montgomery County officials are continuing their push to reduce tolls on the Intercounty Connector and have the State of Maryland further subsidize their sprawl-inducing highway.

Photo by bankbryan.

The latest to complain is new Montgomery County Council President Nancy Floreen, who is calling the tolls "highway robbery." But Floreen strongly supported building the road in the first place, and state officials said all along the road would have tolls to pay back much (but far from all) of the cost.

As one media outlet after another covers local officials' opposition to the tolls and notes that the tolls will be "among the highest in the nation," none seems to have asked Floreen what changed since her original support. Did she know the tolls would be this high, and is now just flipping based on resident outrage, or did she not know? And if she didn't know, why not? The information MdTA is using today to calculate the tolls was available then. Did Floreen not ask what the tolls would be, or did state officials refuse to explain?

A similar drama is beginning for the Interstate 270 widening, where the County Council unanimously voted to support a scaled-down but still expensive widening. Their recommendation calls for two reversible HOT lanes. At the prodding of ACT, the County Council asked SHA what the toll rates were likely to be, but SHA refused to answer. Rather than push harder for answers, the County Council just threw up its hands and approved the road.

If Maryland can ever afford to build the road (since they've spent decades of future transportation money on the ICC), will Floreen and the others start complaining about high tolls there as well?

They might also end up complaining about traffic jams. According to the report by MdTA's consultant for toll rates, maximizing revenue on I-270, as they are on the ICC, depends on "operational failure"—traffic jams. In short, despite officials' pronouncements that this project will relieve congestion, most likely the road will end up with jammed free lanes and free-flowing yet expensive HOT lanes which local politicians will again denounce as inequitable "Lexus lanes" or "highway robbery."

With the ICC, opponents repeatedly warned residents and leaders that this "sticker shock" was likely. Their claims fell on deaf ears, but now are turning out to be spot on. How many members of the Montgomery Council will suddenly discover problems with the I-270 HOT lanes once it's too late? Their best hope is that it will take so long to build the road that they won't be around any more.

Frequent candidate Robin Ficker has joined in the ICC toll whining. He wants Maryland to divert some of its statewide sales tax and upcoming slot gambling revenue to make the ICC free. Michael Dresser notes that the sales tax pays for other services that benefit more Maryland residents, like education, and Montgomery isn't welcoming any slots within its boundaries.

But if Ficker is so eager to use sales tax and slots money for transportation, why not advocate using some of the money to make Metro and the Baltimore transit systems free? Or, better yet, use it to improve MARC? Why do leaders, including anti-tax crusaders like Ficker, want public money to keep driving free but don't bat an eyelash at the rising costs of transit?

43 comments

Floreen, Berliner vote to continue the cycle of sprawl and pollution (Jul 17, 2009)
High ICC tolls show how expensive new freeways are (Oct 19, 2009)
SHA avoids the T word in 270 reply (Oct 28, 2009)
Floreen floats parking tax proposal (Sep 10, 2008)
TPB staples $3 billion 270 widening into plan, ignores MARC (Nov 16, 2010)

Medical Center Metro entrance lives to fight another day

Mon, 20 Jul 2009 08:46:00 EDT

by David Alpert

TPB voted to keep its options open about the pedestrian underpass vs. direct elevator entrance to the Medical Center Metro station. Montgomery Councilmember Marc Elrich made the change at last week's meeting, with an assist by Duchy Trachtenberg, Nancy Floreen, and Roger Berliner. (ACT, Cavan)

Comment

Floreen, Berliner vote to continue the cycle of sprawl and pollution

Fri, 17 Jul 2009 12:18:00 EDT

by David Alpert

Yesterday, the Montgomery County Council's Transportation, Infrastructure, Energy and Environment Committee voted to recommend Alternative 7, which would widen I-270 to 8 regular lanes and two or three reversible HOT lanes. Councilmembers Nancy Floreen (at-large) and Roger Berliner (Bethesda/Chevy Chase) voted for the option, while the third committee member, George Leventhal (at-large) was not present.

Is this northern Montgomery's future?

Alternative 7 is projected to cost $3.88 billion. One argument highway boosters are making to the County Council is that all the money will just come back in tolls on the HOT lanes. They argue, therefore, that we couldn't spend the $4 billion instead on transit improvements, such as better commuter rail service to Frederick, light rail from Rockville to Gaithersburg and Germantown, and other possibilities.

However, the SHA's own numbers don't bear that out. ~~According to ACT,~~ SHA projects the toll lane traffic to only move 2 0-1 mph faster than the free lanes. Obviously, almost everyone would choose to pay nothing over paying something to only gain a tiny bit of speed. Therefore, the tolls would have to be extremely low to keep a reasonable volume of traffic in the proposed lanes. With such a low toll, the road can't possibly come even close to paying back its $4 billion price tag.

Even if the road were free, triggering enormous sprawl out to the County line and into Frederick County, increasing auto-dependence, traffic and pollution throughout the County, and driving economic growth away from the parts of the County that most need it would only harm Montgomery. It's time for the Council to finally say no to more car lanes and more sprawl and choose a different path before it's too late.

In March, Councilmember Marc Elrich called the Council's support for the ICC a "mistake." It will take a severe health toll on residents along its route. 270 already exists, but adding more cars and more traffic will deepen the health cost to residents along the corridor and elsewhere in the County. Montgomery can't afford another mistake.

Send a letter now to the County Council. Your messages will reach them as long as you sign before the start of business Monday. Contact them now.

Update: Thanks to Ben Ross for pointing me to the actual SHA table showing the (lack of) speed difference between the toll and non-toll lanes.

29 comments

Floreen shocked by tolls on project she supported (Dec 24, 2009)
On Tuesday, Montgomery Council can avoid "ICC 2.0" (Jul 16, 2009)
SHA avoids the T word in 270 reply (Oct 28, 2009)
Montgomery groups attack 270 widening, criticize "false choice" (Jul 20, 2009)
Gaithersbungle, part 3: What else can you get for $3.8 billion? (Jul 6, 2009)