Google

MTA to offer free public transit on New Year's Eve


For the first time, the Maryland Transit Administration will offer free service on all local bus, Metro subway and light rail routes on New Year’s Eve this year.

The free service starts at 8 p.m. on Dec. 31 and runs until 2 a.m. on Jan. 1. It is part of Miller Light beer’s national Free Rides program, which is in its 23rd year. Miller Light is bringing the program to Baltimore for the first time. Locally, it is also sponsored by Bond Distributing Co. of Baltimore.

The free-ride service will be available for visitors to the annual Ports America New Year’s Eve Spectacular fireworks display at the Inner Harbor. Light Rail and Metro service will be extended until one hour after the fireworks, which is scheduled from 9 p.m. to 12:30 a.m.

For more information about the free-ride program, call 1-800-FREE-RIDES (1-800-373-3743), text RIDEMTA to 30364, or visit MillerLiteFreeRides.com or <a href="http://www.mtamaryland.gov">www.mtamaryland.gov</a>;.

Continue Reading

  • Currently 0.00/5
Rating: 0.00/5 (0 votes cast)

Tea Partiers See a Global Conspiracy in Local Planning Efforts


image
In the tea partiers’ dystopian vision, the increased density favored by planners to allow for better mass transit become compulsory “human habitation zones.” They warn of Americans being forcibly moved from their suburban dream homes into urban “hobbit homes” and required to give up their cars and instead—gasp!—take the bus to work. The enemies in this fight are hidden behind bland trade-association names like the American Planning Association or ICLEI (Local Governments for Sustainability).

Continue Reading

  • Currently 0.00/5
Rating: 0.00/5 (0 votes cast)

MTA chief pays a call on Route 120 riders


&quot;He let me know his desire to make Maryland’s MTA the premier MTA in the country. He was a bus driver and moved up through the ranks. He takes his job seriously and wants to transport everyone efficiently and safely daily. He can be contacted at RWells@mta.maryland.gov &lt;mailto:RWells@mta.maryland.gov&gt; and he will read and respond to your email.&quot;




Continue Reading

  • Currently 0.00/5
Rating: 0.00/5 (0 votes cast)

Citizens push commission to craft new approach to public transit


By Larry Carson, The Baltimore Sun

Getting around Howard County on a public bus has been slow since 41-year-old David Bittner was a kid. Back then, he knew that his bicycle was a faster way to get to the town's shopping mall from Owen Brown than the old Rouse Co. Columbus system. Suburbia, after all, wasn't designed for mass transit.
...
&quot;It's kind of a system of last resort,&quot; Bittner told the advocates group, who have been pushing for better public transit for a decade.

Bus service is important for economic development, the county's chamber of commerce has said. &quot;The success of our business community requires transportation options,&quot; including &quot;improved level of transit service,&quot; according to the chamber of commerce's legislative action issues statement for 2011.

Republican county executive candidate Trent Kittleman talked about being ready &quot;to accommodate people who don't drive cars&quot; at an Oct. 13 chamber candidates forum when a transportation question was asked.

One problem, Ulman said at the forum, is &quot;we're left out of the mass-transit world,&quot; except for MARC train service at the county's eastern edge. Prospects of Columbia getting service from either Washington's Metro system or Baltimore's light rail line are nil, officials have said, because Howard doesn't have the volume of riders to make it worthwhile.

&quot;We're in this doughnut hole between the large public entities,&quot; said Paul Farragut, commission co-chairman and a former executive director of the Baltimore Metropolitan Council. Allen Cornell, a former board president of Corridor Transportation Corp., now CMRT, is the other co-chairman.

But as county roads become more congested, and with thousands of federal defense workers, contractors and now cybersecurity jobs on the way, better transit and development planning must be part of the mix, officials say.

That's why options such as walking and cycling were important in planning for Columbia's new downtown, and why the county has supported building homes mixed with stores and offices near the three commuter train stations in the county, he said.
...

Continue Reading

  • Currently 0.00/5
Rating: 0.00/5 (0 votes cast)

How Walkable Are the Streets Near Your Transit Stop?


from Streetsblog.net by Angie Schmitt
...

At individual transit sites, however, the usefulness of the database can depend on the location. As Network blog Walkable Dallas-Fort Worth explains, when you look closely, the areas within walking distance of a transit station don’t always match what appears in the database:

Each of these TOD zones requires specific attention to detail. This gets at a broader problem preventing TOD planning from becoming smarter, and that is the ubiquitous 1/2-mile walk circle.

As demonstrated by Walkable Dallas-Fort Worth, a half mile isn't necessarily a walkable distance when the street pattern is accounted for.

The issue with the 1/2-mile circle, intended to simulate a 10-minute walk or a popularly accepted distance to travel by foot to transit stations is that not all 10-minute walks are the same. What is the road network like within that 1/2-mile generic circle? How many roads must be crossed? How direct is the route (yielding a more radial pattern emanating from a center of gravity or attractor – in this case the transit station)? Are there highways to be traversed? How long is the wait to cross at crosswalks, etc. etc.?

As you can see (image right), what actually constitutes an acceptable walking distance is FAR, FAR smaller than the 1/2-mile circle, because it takes a similar amount of time.

Maybe, with some tweaking, this can turn into another benefit of the database: highlighting all the places where re-configuring streets can increase the area served by transit.

...

Continue Reading

  • Currently 0.00/5
Rating: 0.00/5 (0 votes cast)

USA Today on infrastructure spending: what do Americans want?


from Transportation For America by Stephen Lee Davis

USA Today had a timely graphic up yesterday, considering the continuing media coverage around President Obama’s recent proposal for infrastructure spending and a reformed long-term transportation bill.

First, the graphic:

Though we can’t see the rest of the questions or the context, it affirms a few things we already know about Americans’ attitudes about transportation — as evidenced in our own 2010 national poll — and how to fund what we need.

While Americans are actually voting in favor of taxing themselves to improve transportation in state and local ballot measures at a rate of about 70 percent, they often know exactly what they’re going to get in those cases: a new bridge, an expanded transit system, a system of repaired roads, or the like. But the federal program is much fuzzier in most people’s minds. The current system is broken and unaccountable, and putting more money into a broken system is like trying to bring more water up from a well using a bucket with a hole in it.

As James Corless wrote in an Infrastructurist guest post yesterday, “Some of the old guard transportation insiders in D.C. would be thrilled with doubling the overall size of our transportation program and pouring more money into the same broken system, but Americans know better. They want more accountability, safer streets, and more transportation options so seniors can maintain their independence and low wage workers can get to jobs.”

It’s also interesting that the sentence to the left of the poll summarizes it as “Americans would rather use tolls than taxes to build more roads,” when it could have just as easily been “Americans are OK with building no new roads if it means raising the gas tax or instituting tolls to pay for them.”

Maybe the poll asks the wrong question?

We’re not in favor of a moratorium on any new roads whatsoever, but this survey clearly reinforces the fact that Americans in urban and rural areas have moved beyond the idea that the solution to every transportation problem can and should be a new road.

We cooperated on a poll in 2009 with the National Association of Realtors, showing that Americans don’t think expanding roads and highways are the best use of scarce transportation dollars:

“As the federal government makes its plans for transportation funding in 2009, which ONE of the following should be the top priority?”

Maintaining and repairing roads, highways, freeways and bridges Expanding and improving bus, rail, and other public transportation Expanding and improving roads, highways, freeways and bridges Not sure
50% 31% 16% 3%

And as our 2010 poll showed, more than four-in-five voters (82 percent) say that “the United States would benefit from an expanded and improved transportation system, such as rail and buses” and a solid majority (56 percent) “strongly agree” with that statement. Fully 79 percent of rural voters agree as well, despite much lower use of public transportation compared to Americans in urban areas.

If you saw this graphic and your curiosity was piqued, perhaps it’s worth going back and poking through our national poll for a fuller picture.

image

Continue Reading

  • Currently 0.00/5
Rating: 0.00/5 (0 votes cast)

Twelve Anti-Transit Myths: A Conservative Critique


The Dirty Dozen: Twelve Anti-Transit Myths

Myth Number One: Light Rail has been a failure everywhere. The estimated costs always prove too low, and the ridership projections are always too high.
Myth Number Two: Transit is a declining industry.
Myth Number Three: Commuting by rail is slower than commuting by car or bus.
Myth Number Four: Transit does not relieve congestion.
Myth Number Five: Where transit is needed, buses are better than rail. Buses cost less and provide the same or better service.
Myth Number Six: Rail transit can only serve city centers, but most new jobs are in the suburbs.
Myth Number Seven: Rail Transit does not spur economic development.
Myth Number Eight: Transit brings crime into a community.
Myth Number Nine: Most Light Rail riders are former bus riders.
Myth Number Ten: Free market competition and privately operated transit is better.
Myth Number Eleven: On average, most of the seats on a bus or train are empty.
Myth Number Twelve: It would be cheaper to lease or buy a new car for every rider than to build a new light rail system.

A Few More Myths
1. Transit subsidies exceed automobile subsidies.
2. Increasing transit funding does not increase ridership.
3. Transit is not cost effective.
4. Most people do not want rail transit.
5. Monorail is better than Light Rail.
6. Light Rail is not safe.
7. Transit infrastructure is only constructed to get federal money.
8. Rail transit does not help revitalize downtowns.
9. Transit is an 'inferior' good; as incomes rise, demand declines.
10. Transit inefficiencies and failures are the result of politics.
11. Rail transit is a federal conspiracy.
12. Transit is not important because its market share is so small.
13. Transit systems are poor stewards of public funds.
14. Rail transit does not increase property values.
15. Before federal involvement, transit paid for itself.
16. Light Rail is promoted by overly low fares.
17. Cutting spending on transit would allow tax cuts.
18. Transit subsidies should be directed to users, not providers.
19. Light Rail is social engineering.
20. Transit costs more than it should.
21. Trains are noisy.
22. The overhead wires for Light Rail are ugly.

Continue Reading

  • Currently 0.00/5
Rating: 0.00/5 (0 votes cast)

Report Finds Those Living Near Public Transportation Live Healthier, Longer


From AASHTO Jurnal

Individuals who live in communities with high-quality mass transit are generally healthier than their counterparts residing in areas that are more dependent on automobiles, concludes a newly released report from the American Public Transportation Association.

The report, prepared for APTA by the Canadian research organization Victoria Transport Policy Institute, focuses on what it characterizes as the important but often overlooked health benefits that public transportation can provide.

&quot;People who live or work in communities with high-quality public transportation tend to own fewer vehicles, drive less, and use alternative modes more than they would in more automobile-oriented locations,&quot; according to the report. &quot;This can provide large reductions in traffic crashes and pollution emissions, increases in physical fitness and mental health, and improved access to healthy food, housing, and medical care.&quot;

A person's primary means of travel activity, the report asserts, can help lessen several of his or her risks among the 10 leading causes of reduced lifespan as identified by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The 10 U.S. counties with the most transit-oriented growth, for example, have about one-fourth the traffic fatality rates as those counties with the most sprawling development.

The report underscores how pollution from automobiles can cause cancer and birth defects. The report, citing recent studies that have found that those regularly riding mass transit walk more than individuals not using such services, also emphasizes how a sedentary lifestyle can lead to strokes and heart disease.

&quot;This is not to suggest that people should be forced to shift from driving to walking, cycling, and public transit just to achieve health objectives, but it does suggest that decisionmakers and the general public should be informed about the substantial safety and health benefits that can result from improved public transit and more transit-oriented development,&quot; according to the report.

Potential health impacts of transit should assume an even-more-prominent role in overall transportation planning, the report concludes.

The 33-page report, &quot;Evaluating Public Transportation Health Benefits,&quot; is available at <a href="http://tinyurl.com/APTA-Report">http://tinyurl.com/APTA-Report</a>;

Continue Reading

  • Currently 0.00/5
Rating: 0.00/5 (0 votes cast)