In the arena of transportation, PlanBaltimore! brings to light numerous important issues to be addressed by the City of Baltimore in the coming years. We look forward to working with the Planning Department, other public agencies, and partner organizations to see these recommendations implemented.

We offer one comment not at all addressed by PlanBaltimore! In the last ten years, the responsibility for planning and policy related to transportation has been ill-advisedly placed under the purview of the Baltimore City Department of Public Works. Numerous planning and technical studies have and are taking place which are more appropriately supervised and coordinated by the Department of City Planning. Among these studies are the Westside Intermodal Corridor Study, East-West Corridor Study (People Mover), submissions to the State Transportation Enhancements Program, and the reopening of Lexington Pedestrian Mall to vehicular traffic. Too many times, studies conducted and plans developed within the Department of Public Works have been closed from public participation and the scrutiny of a public body such as the Planning Commission. As a result, city residents and organizations have been left out of the transportation planning process.

Under the current structure, the Department of Public Works has responsibility for both the consideration and implementation of transportation-related proposals We believe that a system of checks and balances must be put in place. We urge the City to place full authority for transportation planning within the Planning Department. The Department of Public Works should have responsibility only for the implementation of actions decided upon by the Planning Department and Commission with full public input. In this manner, citizens will have access to decisions and decisionmakers on transportation issues, and the local and regional planning processes will be more congruent.

The City of Baltimore had a prime opportunity to be a leader in advocating for reform of the long-range transportation planning process when the Federal Transit Administration and Federal Highway Administration reprimanded the Baltimore metropolitan planning organization for deficiencies in the regional planning process. Instead of taking a leadership role in responding to the Joint Certification Review, the City abdicated its responsibility and voted to continue with "business as usual." The City could have demanded reforms in the structure of the metropolitan planning organization that strengthened its role within the Transportation Steering Committee by supporting a system of weighted representation and greater public involvement from the public. If city leaders truly agree with this goal, we urge the City to oppose the recertification of the Transportation Steering Committee as the Baltimore metropolitan planning organization. It is vital that the City communicate this message to the appropriate federal agencies by December 1999 when a recertification report is to be issued.

Further, if the City truly believes in this goal, it must be a partner in good-faith at the metropolitan planning organization. The City must be a leader in regional planning by not bypassing the regional process in order to gain state or federal funding for projects not otherwise included in the long-range transportation plan. In short, the City must lead by example, in order to bring all of the relevant stakeholders to the point of taking the regional planning process seriously.

Current State expenditures on highways more than double those for transit – a situation which is no longer acceptable, if we are to meet the State’s goal of doubling transit ridership by 2020. The Citizens Planning and Housing Association is developing a vocal and active constituency in behalf of public transit. We envision this organization, known as the Transit Riders League of Metropolitan Baltimore, as an advocacy organization that will demand better funding of public transportation from the State of Maryland. In turn, we will expect greater service from the Mass Transit Administration. The City of Baltimore must be a partner in this effort. Working together, we can bring about necessary reforms in the funding of transportation in the State of Maryland.

We oppose, however, chasing the newest "fad" in transportation modes simply because federal funds are available for demonstration projects. The Mass Transit Administration has identified millions of dollars in improvements which will enhance existing bus, light rail, subway, and MARC services, and expand their reach throughout the Baltimore region. Building a "people-mover" or "MAGLEV" train may not be the most cost-effective or important enhancements that can be made to our transit system. We urge the City to move cautiously in supporting new modes of transportation and to consider their effects on existing enhancement and expansion plans for the core transit system.

We pledge to continue working with the City of Baltimore and the Mass Transit Administration to make transit more inviting and convenient in order to increase ridership. In April, we sponsored (with assistance from the City Planning Department, Mass Transit Administration, Neighborhood Design Center, and Mondawmin Mall) a workshop for residents and institutions of the Mondawmin community to gather input for improvements to the Mondawmin Transit Center. Since the workshop, residents and institutional representatives have been working to develop specific recommendations with technical assistance being provided by CPHA. A plan will be submitted to the appropriate public agencies in early July for making improvements to the station. We believe that this charette process ought to be used in developing plans for intermodal transit hubs at other strategic locations throughout the City. Specifically, we believe that transit hubs need to be developed at Greenmount Avenue & 33^rd St., Johns Hopkins Hospital, and in the area of Lexington Market.

Finally, while the recommendation of addressing the needs of reverse commuters is an appropriate one, we question the current strategy being used by the City, Empowerment Zone Village Centers, and Mass Transit Administration. In the short-term, providing reverse commute service via contracted private-shuttle service on an ad hoc basis is helping to ease the transportation problems of those seeking employment in suburban jurisdictions; but this must not be the long-term strategy. The City of Baltimore should advocate for fixed routes and schedules from the Mass Transit Administration that meet the needs of all commuters, including those going from city to suburb. To accomplish this, action from the State Legislature will be required to ease or lift the current farebox recovery law so that suburban service can become a sustainable part of MTA’s core services.

The City and State must continue to reinvest in established communities by maintaining the existing infrastructure of roads and bridges. We suggest, however, that a priority system of improvements be closely linked to the efforts established by the Neighborhood Planning Program. This will have two important effects. First, road and bridge improvements can be used to lead the process of redevelopment and reinvestment in communities with such designations. Second, for preservation and stabilization areas, road and bridge investments must be in syncrhony with neighborhood plans. Traffic calming measures, bicycle and pedestrian enhancements, improvement of the transit environment, and other community transportation tools can be used to support neighborhood quality of life.

We find the recommendations to improve parking downtown to be incomplete. PlanBaltimore should also include concrete proposals to reduce the demand for parking in the Central Business District. Current proposals to increase the amount of parking available downtown may, in fact, exacerbate the problems of congestion and air pollution. Instead of solely adding more parking to downtown, thereby increasing the number of autos that crowd narrow streets and pollute the region’s air, we propose three transportation demand management tools to reduce the demand for single-occupant auto use; all must be cooperatively implemented by downtown business, business leadership organizations, the City, and others.

1) Commuter Choice – A new Maryland law provides a 50% tax credit for employer-provided transit benefits up to $30 per employee per month. This will cut commuting costs for transit riders by as much as $720 per month (assuming the employer gives a free transit pass of $60 per month), and generate an annual tax cut of up to $360 per employee for Maryland employers. Employees and employers can also take advantage of a similar federal law that allows up to $65 per month per employee to be used to subsidize transit, car-pool, or other alternate forms of transportation.

2) Guaranteed Ride Home – Many downtown employees do not use public transportation, or take advantage of carpool, vanpool, or other ride-sharing options because these forms of commuting do not provide flexibility for those who need to leave work early for an emergency or stay at work late. The creation of a guaranteed ride home service (GRH) gives employees the peace of mind necessary to use alternate transportation without fear of being stranded at work. Employers benefit by not having to pay the cost of parking for every employee (usually far more expensive than paying for a monthly transit pass), in tax savings through the state and federal "commuter choice" law, and by improving air quality and congestion in the region.

There are numerous ways to implement GRH: employers could subsidize the cost of a taxi used from the savings of not providing parking to every employee, the Mass Transit Administration could use its mobility vans to provide rides, or the Baltimore Metropolitan Council could designate funds from the Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality program to administer the program. The role of the Downtown Partnership should be to advocate for the creation of a GRH service and to urge that downtown employers use it.

3) Parking Cash-Out – Under "parking cash-out," employees are given the choice of receiving the usual parking subsidy from their employer (usually a cash allowance or free- or reduced-price parking space) or to receive the cash equivalent of the parking subsidy. With the cash, employees then can choose to use public transit, car- or van-pools, bike, or even walk to work. Again, when combined with a guaranteed-ride home, employers have the peace-of-mind to use alternative transportation means.

We urge the inclusion of these and other TDM tools in the PlanBaltimore! recommendations, and we pledge to work with the City and business leadership organizations to see them implemented.

We wholeheartedly support the recommendations to enhance the quality of bicycle and pedestrian facilities in the City of Baltimore.