Transit Network Improvements and Regional Transit Corridors Technical Report Table of Contents Table of Contents

Chapter 1 Introduction 4 Regional Transit Corridor Characteristics...... 40 Identification of Gaps, Needs, and Opportunities...... 5 Modes...... 40 Transit Network Improvements...... 5 Minimum Service Levels...... 40 Regional Transit Corridors...... 5 Transit Priority Improvements...... 43 Next Steps for Regional Transit Corridors...... 52 Chapter 2 Transit Network Improvements 6 Expansion of Existing Fixed-Route Services...... 8 Appendix 1 Corridor Profiles Small Area Plans and Shared Mobility Applications ...... 13 Appendix 2 Prioritization Methodologies Transit Hubs...... 18 Next Steps for Transit Network Improvements...... 19

Chapter 3 Regional Transit Corridors 22 Overview of Regional Transit Corridors...... 22 Prioritization of Regional Transit Corridors ...... 25 Prioritization Process...... 25 Prioritization Methodology...... 26 Prioritization Groups...... 27 Early Opportunity Corridors...... 28 Mid-Term Opportunity Corridors...... 30 Long-Term Opportunity Corridors...... 32 Next Steps for All Prioritization Groups...... 34 Transit Readiness...... 35 Introduction

Identification of Regional Transit Introduction Gaps, Needs, and Corridors ———————————————————————————— 1 Opportunities Regional Transit Corridors are key ———————————————————————————— areas for the planning of new transit The recommended Transit Network assets over the next 25 years. Areas Improvements and Regional Transit identified as Regional Transit Corridors The Regional Transit Plan (“the This technical report describes: Corridors contained in this technical demonstrate transit demand that Plan”) describes three initiatives by • The identification of Transit Network report were based on transit gaps, justifies infrastructure, services, and/or which the region will achieve the Improvements needs, and opportunities identified technology improvements. All the six plan objectives. These initiatives • The selection and prioritization of through a study of existing conditions, selected corridors are regionally are Strategies, Transit Network Regional Transit Corridors an analysis of the market demand significant, providing crucial Improvements, and Regional Transit for transit, a review of best practices connectivity within and between Corridors. The Strategies are detailed related to the customer journey, jurisdictions. in the Plan and are referenced and through public and stakeholder throughout this technical report in outreach. gray boxes. The Plan does not define specific routes, service patterns, alignments, Transit Network or levels of service, nor does it identify specific stations or modes Improvements to serve those corridors. Relevant ———————————————————————————— stakeholders will conduct future Transit Network Improvements studies in coordination with MDOT are smaller improvements to local MTA to identify the appropriate or express transit service already levels of service, mode, and stations operating in the region. These to serve these corridors as the Plan improvements were identified by is implemented over the next 25 analyzing the existing transit network, years. The 30 corridors defined in this market demand for transit, and plan are meant to remain flexible to existing and future travel flows. The accommodate the results of future improvements fall into four categories: feasibility studies. The details included in Chapter 3, and in the Appendices • Expanded Transit Service of this technical report, should provide • Small Area Plans and Shared local decision-makers the tools to Mobility Applications plan and implement recommended • Improvements to Existing Rail corridor service and assets. Corridors • Transit Hubs

More information on this analysis can be found in the Existing and Future Conditions Technical Report.

4 5 Network Improvement Areas Transit Network Improvements Subject to future feasibility analysis Transit Network and local jurisdiction support 2 Improvements

There are specific areas in the • Expansion of the existing transit Central Maryland region that have service, including a demonstrated need for small, ̵ Additional service on existing localized, or express transit network routes improvements. These improvements ̵ New local or express transit are needed to fill in gaps in service, routes feed into the corridors, and improve • Small area plans in locations that the customer journey (as detailed need further analysis and/or could in the Customer Journey Technical benefit from Shared Mobility Report). The Transit Network solutions Improvements are one of three • Existing rail corridor improvements initiatives developed for the Plan, with • Creation of transit hubs the Strategies and the Regional Transit Corridors. Each of these components These improvements are identified will provide the greatest benefit when based on analysis of the existing transit they work together. This chapter will network, the transit market demand, discuss various types of transit network and existing and future travel flows improvements recommended for the (which are further documented in region, including: the Existing and Future Conditions Technical Report). Input from stakeholders and the public were also critical in developing and refining this slate of improvements.

Figure 2-1 6 Network Improvement Areas 7 Network Improvements and Corridors Technical Report Transit Network Improvements

a market demand for transit greater Expansion of Existing than the current provision of transit services in the peak, off-peak, and/or Fixed-Route Services Area Name Rationale Peak

———————————————————————————— weekend time periods. In some cases, County Off Peak One major element of the network there is no existing transit service in Weekend improvements is the expansion of the given time period. For instance, Existing service has low frequency and limited span Brooklyn x x x in all periods. (Note: Brooklyn extends into Anne existing fixed-route services. This Harford County has no fixed-route Arundel County.) expansion falls into two categories: the transit service on the weekend. Cherry Hill x x x High need area identified by market analysis. addition of service on existing routes, and the creation of new local and Recommendations are detailed below East Impact Area x x x High need area identified by market analysis. express transit routes. in Table 2-1 along with a rationale for Existing free Harbor Connector operates only Inner Harbor x x during weekday peak hours. Other service exists in improving service, often in reference other periods but at a much higher fare. to current limited or nonexistence Additional Service on Existing Routes Park Heights Impact Baltimore City Baltimore x x x High need area identified by market analysis. The need for additional service was service. Area identified in areas that demonstrate Southwest Impact x x x High need area identified by market analysis. Area Table 2-1 West Impact Area x x x High need area identified by market analysis. Proposed Expansion of Existing Fixed-Route Service and Rationale Cockeysville x Growing retail and employment corridor. Dundalk (Wise Existing service has limited span on weekends but x Avenue) demonstrates high all-day demand. Existing service has low frequency and limited span Area Name Rationale Essex x x in off-peak and on weekends but demonstrates

Peak high all-day demand. County Off Peak Weekend MD 43 (Crossroads) x x Growing employment center. Existing service has low frequency and limited Arundel Mills x x x Existing service has low frequency and limited span span in all periods. Middle River x x in off-peak and on weekends but demonstrates Existing service has low frequency and limited high all-day demand. Brooklyn Park x x x span in all periods. (Note: Brooklyn extends into Existing service has low frequency and limited span Baltimore City.) Perry Hall x x in off-peak and on weekends but demonstrates Existing service has limited span (during peak high all-day demand. Crofton x x x hours only) and no off-peak or weekend service Existing service has low frequency and limited currently exists. Randallstown x span on weekends but demonstrates high all-day In need of improved transfers to internal shuttles, demand. Baltimore County Baltimore Fort Meade/Odenton x x new park and ride service, and local service to/from Existing service has low frequency and limited Crofton, Odenton, and Laurel. Reisterstown/Glyndon x span on weekends but demonstrates high all-day Anne Arundel Glen Burnie x x x Existing service has low frequency in all periods. demand. Existing service has low frequency and limited West Towson has unmet demand in the peak, Maryland City x x x span in all periods. Towson x x x limited span and frequency in the off-peak, and no service on the weekend. Parole Existing service has low frequency and limited x x x (Annapolis Mall) span in all periods. Tradepoint Atlantic x x x Growing employment center. Severn x x x Existing service has low frequency in all periods. Existing service has low frequency and limited span White Marsh x x in off-peak and on weekends but demonstrates high all-day demand.

8 9 Network Improvements and Corridors Technical Report Transit Network Improvements

Table 2-1 New Local and Express Transit Routes to several other suburbs in Howard Proposed Expansion of Existing Fixed-Route Service and Rationale (continued) New local and express bus routes (or, County. The Plan also identified transit in the case of the Inner Harbor, ferry routes connecting major activity routes) were identified after examining centers along the Baltimore Beltway existing travel flows and gathering (I-695). These could be local or express Area Name Rationale feedback from the public and bus routes or a combination of both. Peak County Off Peak

Weekend stakeholders. These recommended additions are also shown in Figure 2-1 Some new transit connections Aberdeen & Aberdeen Existing service has low frequency and limited x x x Proving Ground span in all periods. with dotted lines. are related to the Regional Transit Existing service has low frequency and limited Corridors, which are detailed in Bel Air x x x span in all periods. Current travel flow analysis reveals Section 3 of this report. For instance, Existing service has low frequency and limited significant movement between there is currently no fixed‑route service

Harford Edgewood x x x span in all periods. Harford County to Baltimore City between Crofton and Glen Burnie or Existing service has low frequency and limited and County (mainly White Marsh, Baltimore and points north, which Havre de Grace x x x span in all periods. Towson, and Downtown Baltimore), aligns with Corridor #4. The same Existing service has low frequency and limited span especially in off-peak hours, that is is true of Ellicott City to Elkridge/ Columbia x x in off-peak and on weekends but demonstrates underserved by existing transit. The Arundel Mills (Corridor #30). The Plan high all-day demand. timing and frequency of these trips recommends establishing these new Columbia Gateway x Existing service has low frequency in peak periods. suggest that these are shift workers services early to prepare the corridor Elkridge x Existing service has limited span on weekends. who may not be adequately served for the transit assets and investments Existing service has low frequency in peak periods by the Perryville‑to‑Penn Station that its corridor status will bring. Ellicott City x x and limited span on weekends but demonstrates segment of the MARC train. Many high all-day demand. suburb‑to‑suburb connections are New routes and their possible type Hickory Ridge x Existing service has limited span on weekends. identified as well, such as express of service are summarized below in Existing service has low frequency in peak periods service from Columbia to Arundel Table 2-2. Jessup x x and limited span on weekends but demonstrates Mills, or local service from Maple Lawn high all-day demand.

Howard Existing service has low frequency and limited Laurel x x x span in all periods but demonstrates high all-day demand. Montgomery Woods x Existing service has low frequency in peak periods. North Laurel x Existing service has low frequency in peak periods. Table 2-2 Peak demand is very high in many areas that New Local and Express Transit Routes Route 1 Corridor x x x have only 60-minute frequency. Weekend span is shorter than 12 hours. Type of County Area Name Link Destination / Need West Elkridge Service (Waterloo, Woodland x Existing service has low frequency in peak periods. Village) Arundel Mills Local or Express Bus Fort Meade, Ellicott City Points north to Glen Burnie and Baltimore; Crofton Local or Express Bus Annapolis Anne Fort Meade/ Laurel, Crofton, Arundel Mills; Internal campus Arundel Local Bus Odenton circulation needs Glen Burnie/ Local Bus Community circulation needs Cromwell Possible additional ferry connections from Baltimore Inner Harbor Ferry South Baltimore to Inner Harbor, Harbor East, City Fells Point, and Canton

10 11 Network Improvements and Corridors Technical Report Transit Network Analysis Transit Network Improvements

Table 2-2 New Local and Express Transit Routes (continued)

Type of County Area Name Link Destination / Need Service Crosstown service to connect east and west Belair Road (Overlea, Local Bus neighborhoods (Hamilton, Parkville, Towson, Putty Hill, Perry Hall) Baltimore Rosedale) and arterial transit routes City & Crosstown service to connect east and west County Harford Road Local Bus neighborhoods (Perry Hall, Putty Hill, Towson, (Hamilton, Parkville) Rosedale) and arterial transit routes Future or growing job center needing new MD 43 (Crossroads) Local or Express Bus local or express transit routes Essex Local Bus Tradepoint Atlantic Middle River Local Bus Tradepoint Atlantic Owings Mills Local Bus Owings Mills local circulator

Baltimore Perry Hall Local or Express Bus White Marsh, Towson, Essex Shared Mobility Services clockwise from top left: Olli (autonomous shuttle), Via (microtransit), County Pikesville Local or Express Bus Towson Zipcar (carshare), Revel (moped-share), Lime (bikeshare), Spin (scootershare). (Photo credits: Local Motors; City of Arlington, TX; Brown Daily Herald/David Deckey; Revel; Flickr/Lorianne White Marsh, Perry Hall, Parkville, Pikesville; Towson Local or Express Bus DiSabato; Spin.) Community circulation needs White Marsh, Middle River; Future or growing Tradepoint Atlantic Local or Express Bus job center White Marsh Local or Express Bus Perry Hall Aberdeen & Belair, White Marsh, Perry Hall, Edgewood; Aberdeen Proving Local or Express Bus Internal campus circulation needs Harford Ground • Existing transit route alignments Small Area Plans and levels of service Edgewood Local or Express Bus Towson, White Marsh/Rossville and Shared Mobility • Need for new transit services Clarksville Express Bus Laurel, Savage, Jessup, Kings Contrivance • Campus/community circulation Columbia Local or Express Bus Ellicott City, MD 175 Corridor Applications needs Elkridge Express Bus Ellicott City ——————————————————— • Pedestrian/bike connectivity Several job centers in Central Maryland Elkridge, West Friendship, Columbia, Arundel • Transportation demand Ellicott City Local or Express Bus Mills are expected to experience significant management (TDM) applications growth in the next 25 years or have Jessup Local or Express Bus Clarksville, Maple Lawn • Shared Mobility applications such other needs or challenges in providing Kings Contrivance Local or Express Bus Clarksville, Maple Lawn as e-scooters transit to and from job sites. Providing • Microtransit service models Howard Laurel Local or Express Bus Clarksville, Maple Lawn specific recommendations to improve Maple Lawn Local or Express Bus Laurel, Savage, Jessup, Kings Contrivance access to and mobility within these Small area plans should address Future or growing job center needing new job centers depends on several factors both transit service needs and transit Route 1 Corridor Local or Express Bus local or express transit routes; Community beyond the scope of this plan. The circulation needs readiness. They should be conducted Plan recommends these locations for Savage Local or Express Bus Clarksville, Maple Lawn early within the Plan’s 25-year period “small area plans” to be examined in so that the results of the studies can West Elkridge greater detail (see Table 2-3). These (Waterloo, Local or Express Bus Ellicott City be fully incorporated into the Plan. Woodland Village) studies should engage stakeholders, employers, and the public to evaluate factors including:

12 13 Network Improvements and Corridors Technical Report Transit Network Improvements

Other sites were identified as not Shared Mobility is discussed in further Small Shared Area County Area Mobility Rationale being supportive of fixed-route transit detail in the Customer Journey Name but possible candidates for Shared Technical Report. A list of areas Plans Application Mobility or microtransit applications. designated for small area plan studies Evaluate area, as it has some significant need Dundalk x x due to socioeconomic characteristics and high These solutions include bikeshare, or Shared Mobility applications, as well job density but is isolated on a peninsula scooter-share, moped-share, as the rationale for their selection, is Evaluate area, as it has some significant carsharing, Transportation Network provided below in Table 2-3. travel flows but may not be suitable for fixed Hunt Valley x Companies (TNCs), ridesplitting, transit based on road network, population microtransit (e.g., Via), or automated socioeconomic characteristics, and density shuttles. Evaluate area, as it has some significant travel flows but may not be suitable for fixed Owings Mills x transit based on road network, population Table 2-3 socioeconomic characteristics, and density Areas Designated for Small Area Plans or Shared Mobility Applications Baltimore County Study internal community circulation needs Towson x and demonstrated need for several new suburb‑to-suburb local or express routes Small Shared Area County Area Mobility Rationale Tradepoint Examine this future or growing job center based Name x Plans Application Atlantic on workforce origins Fort Meade/ Identify internal campus circulation needs and x x Aberdeen & Odenton needs for new local or express routes Aberdeen Study internal campus circulation needs and x x Evaluate area, as it has some significant travel Proving needs for new local or express routes Glen Burnie/ x flows but may not be suitable for fixed-transit Ground Cromwell based on road network Evaluate area, as it has some significant Harford Northwest Parole Evaluate area, as it has some significant need travel flows but may not be suitable for fixed Bel Air/ x x (Annapolis x due to socioeconomic characteristics and high transit based on road network, population Forest Hill Mall) job density but is isolated on a peninsula socioeconomic characteristics, and density Anne Arundel Evaluate area, as it has some significant Study area as it demonstrates transit demand travel flows but may not be suitable for fixed but may not be suitable for fixed transit based Pasadena x Dunloggin x transit based on road network, population on road network, population socioeconomic socioeconomic characteristics, and density characteristics, and density Evaluate additional ferry connections from Study area as it demonstrates transit demand South Baltimore (Cherry Hill and Middle Branch Hickory but may not be suitable for fixed transit based x waterfront) to Inner Harbor, Harbor East, Fells Ridge on road network, population socioeconomic Point, and Canton. characteristics, and density Inner Harbor x x Evaluate turning all Water Taxi routes into Evaluate area as it has some significant travel public ferry routes under the Harbor Connector flows but may not be suitable for fixed transit Maple Lawn x brand and fee structure. based on road network, and the worker Baltimore City

Howard population’s socioeconomic characteristics Examine feasibility of water ferry routes to Tradepoint Atlantic. Route 1 Examine the internal community circulation x Corridor needs of this future or growing job center Evaluate area, as it is slated for population and Savage x job growth Study area, as it demonstrates transit demand Turf Valley but may not be suitable for fixed transit based (West x on road network, population socioeconomic Friendship) characteristics, and density

14 15 Network Improvements and Corridors Technical Report Transit Network Improvements

Transit Readiness Case Study Leveraging Partnerships to Increase Existing Rail-based Transit Value

development is transit-supportive, creates connections that allow transit‑oriented development to expand to parcels beyond station areas, and establishes a program for Mobility Hubs for given station contexts.

Denver Housing Authority (DHA)’s redevelopment of the 15-acre, 270-unit South Lincoln Homes demonstrates how a major landowner in the vicinity of an existing rail station can be a strategic partner with the region’s major transit provider. DHA’s South Lincoln Redevelopment Master The redevelopment led to new public spaces and buffered and structured parking. Public- Plan (2010) recognized the value private partnerships brought about jobs for residents, workforce training, and formerly of RTD’s 10th and Osage Station as unavailable services like healthy food outlets. (Photo credit: Kittelson and Associates.) significant among the area’s assets. for residents. The community, now investments by other public and When DHA redeveloped the former known as Maricopa, attained DHA’s private partners facilitated by RTD’s The area around the 10th and Osage South Lincoln Homes into nearly highest rate of resident retention, station design support and proactive Station (shown in blue) before and after 900 new units, it also built new more than 45 percent. coordination with developers and redevelopment. streets and alleys, inviting and local jurisdictions. comfortable public spaces and The 10th and Osage Station served The City of Denver’s Transit Oriented plazas, community gardens, a 2,100 daily boardings in 2018, a RTD leveraged private partnerships, Denver (2014) and Regional Transit community center, an elementary 30 percent increase from 2011. public funding, and local businesses Denver (RTD)’s First and Last Mile school, and retail space on the DHA’s initial investment continues to enhance existing rail investment. Strategic Plan and Mobility Hub ground floor of new multi-family to attract new private investment Increasing the density of activities Guidelines (2019) have different but buildings. DHA partnered with with major mixed-use projects and people around the station in closely related goals. Taken together, businesses and non-profits to in various stages of permitting turn created a market for transit they focus attention on the details establish training and employment and construction. This notable services. Addressing the connectivity of access and local mobility in each opportunities that would also offer and growing increase in the use and pedestrian comfort to and from RTD station’s potential influence convenient access to formerly of an existing transit asset has the station increased accessibility to areas. These plans ensure that unavailable jobs, goods and services been achieved primarily through transit for the entire area.

16 17 Network Improvements and Corridors Technical Report Transit Network Improvements

• Gauging the potential for intermodal connections Next Steps for Transit • Increasing the ease of access Network Improvements for park and ride commuters, ——————————————————————————— pedestrians, and cyclists The Plan recommends Transit Network Improvements to be implemented A hub may feature components of throughout the Plan’s 25-year horizon. several design and/or improvement In the short term, local jurisdictions types depending upon the location and transit agencies should initiate and expected use. Transit hubs may be high-level and detailed planning by on-street or off-street and may support setting goals, engaging the public, different modes of travel. The West identifying funding, and conducting Baltimore MARC Station is an example studies for each of the recommended of an off-street transit hub. Ensuring improvements. As the Plan is updated West Baltimore MARC Station Transit Hub adequate wayfinding improves the every five years, the appropriate functionality and seamlessness for next steps may change for various Transit Hub Design customers. improvements as the transit network Transit Hubs Several different types of hub concepts and its needs are reevaluated. ———————————————————————————— or improvements could be deployed Transit Hubs Transit hubs (also called transfer to implement the recommendations On the next page, Table 2-4 lists major centers) are important for both transit of the Plan. Factors in choosing transit hubs and their respective STRATEGIES passengers and transit operators. ! Grow Bus Ridership the appropriate hub design or jurisdictions. The hub locations, as Well‑situated and well‑designed improvements include: well as existing transit corridors, are • Partner with employers and transit hubs can significantly improve • Estimating how many vehicles shown in Figure 2-2. More detailed large-scale development one of the most inconvenient parts would serve the hub each day study of each transit hub is required to connect residents to job of a transit trip for passengers: the • Predicting how many passengers to determine the best and most centers transfer experience. Transit hubs would use the hub each day appropriate transit hub improvement • Plan and construct transit enable more connected transit • Ensuring there is enough capacity applicable to the site. These hubs have hubs and inter-modal transfer route design and can more easily for many vehicles to serve the hub been identified because they warrant facilities accommodate amenities for transit simultaneously additional infrastructure and amenities • Expand the Frequent Transit drivers and operations staff. such as bus bays or an off-street bus Network loop, seating, canopies or protection from the weather, wayfinding signage, realtime passenger information signs, STRATEGIES and other investments. ! Grow Commuter Bus Ridership • Develop a park-and-ride lot plan to grow the capacity and access to Commuter Bus service • Throughout these Technical Reports, gray Partner with employers and large-scale development boxes with the red ! will present strategies Charles Center to connect residents to job Transit Hub from the Plan that are related to the previous centers Rendering section.

18 19 Network Improvements and Corridors Technical Report Regional Transit Hubs Transit Network Improvements Subject to future feasibility analysis and local jurisdiction support Table 2-4 Transit Hubs

Number Name Jurisdiction 1 Arundel Mills Anne Arundel County 2 BWI Airport Anne Arundel County 3 Glen Burnie/Cromwell Anne Arundel County 4 Parole/Annapolis Anne Arundel County 5 Baltimore Arena Baltimore City 6 Bayview Medical Center Baltimore City 7 Camden Station Baltimore City 8 Charles Center Baltimore City 9 Johns Hopkins Hospital Baltimore City 10 Lexington Market Baltimore City 11 Mondawmin Baltimore City 12 Morgan State University Baltimore City 13 Penn North Metro Baltimore City 14 Penn Station Baltimore City 15 Rogers Avenue Baltimore City 16 State Center/Cultural Center Baltimore City 17 UM Medical Center Baltimore City 18 Walbrook Junction Baltimore City 19 West Baltimore Baltimore City 20 Essex Baltimore County 21 Owings Mills Baltimore County 22 Patapsco Baltimore County 23 Towson Baltimore County 24 White Marsh Baltimore County 25 Aberdeen Harford County 26 Bel Air Harford County 27 Columbia Town Center Howard County

Figure 2-2 20 Transit Hubs 21 Regional Transit Corridors Regional Transit Corridors Subject to future feasibility analysis Regional and local jurisdiction support 3 Transit Corridors

The Plan identifies and prioritizes stakeholder feedback to compare the 30 Regional Transit Corridors. These demand, needs, potential impacts, corridors are key areas of anticipated and transit readiness of each corridor. transit need for the next 25 years. Upon publication of the Plan, local All the corridors are of regional jurisdictions and local transit providers significance, providing important will be able to follow these priorities connectivity within and between and study the feasibility and needs on jurisdictions in Central Maryland. the corridors in detail. The process of conducting an alternatives analysis, The corridors share several common selecting modes and alignments, features that distinguish them from producing the final design, and other proposals in the Plan. Each implementing new assets will be has or is projected to have sufficient completed with input from the public ridership demand to support all‑day, and stakeholders. frequent transit. The corridors also require additional infrastructure investment (described in this chapter’s Overview of Regional Transit Priority Improvements section) Transit Corridors to fully support successful transit. ——————————————————————————— The Plan identified the Regional Corridor identification is the first step Transit Corridors in Central Maryland in creating a more connected and based on existing and future travel robust regional transit network. While patterns, land use, and demographics, the corridors represent major areas of as well as stakeholder input. These transit infrastructure need, the Plan corridors, shown in the schematic does not identify specific transit routes map in Figure 3-1, traverse the region and/or stations and does not prescribe with connections to major population modes, alignments, or service levels. and activity centers, in addition to Careful study beyond the scope of external destinations at Silver Spring in this Plan is required to assess demand Montgomery County, Laurel in Prince and local context before investing in George’s County, and Washington, D.C. specific transit assets. Each corridor represents major origins and destinations and serves areas Each corridor was categorized as an with high existing or future transit early-, mid-, or long-term opportunity. demand. Corridors are named after Corridor prioritization was based on their endpoints but also connect many quantitative analysis, public input, and activity centers and transit nodes.

Figure 3-1 22 Regional Transit Corridors 23 Network Improvements and Corridors Technical Report Regional Transit Corridors

Table 3-1 lists each corridor’s name, jurisdictions served, and length, ranging Prioritization of Figure 3-2 from 5 to 17 miles. The number associated with each corridor is an identification Corridor Prioritization Process number; it does not represent priority order. Baltimore City is served by 19 Regional Transit corridors, the most of any jurisdiction. For a detailed map and evaluation of each corridor, see Appendix I: Corridor Profiles. Corridors All the corridors identified in this Table 3-1 | Regional Transit Corridors chapter were selected for their Miles potential to meet the region’s transit NO. Name Jurisdictions Served within needs within the Plan’s horizon; Region however, the current level of readiness 1 Morgan State Univ. to South Baltimore Baltimore City 7 for investment of individual corridors 2 Glen Burnie to South Baltimore Anne Arundel County, Baltimore City 7 varies across the region. The Plan 3 Glen Burnie to Annapolis Anne Arundel County 17 prioritizes the corridors in a 25-year 4 Glen Burnie to Bowie Anne Arundel County 15 timeframe. To provide a timeline for the region to identify existing assets 5 Convention Center to Middle River Baltimore City, Baltimore County 11 and prepare corridors for investment 6 Towson to UM Transit Center Baltimore City, Baltimore County 9 when funding becomes available, the 7 Towson to Hunt Valley Baltimore County 7 Plan categorizes each corridor as an 8 Towson to South Baltimore Baltimore City, Baltimore County 13 early‑, mid‑, or long‑term opportunity. 9 North Plaza to UM Transit Center Baltimore City, Baltimore County 11 10 White Marsh to Johns Hopkins Hospital Baltimore City, Baltimore County 10 Prioritization Process The Plan prioritizes corridors according 11 Fallston to Aberdeen Proving Ground Harford County 16 to a data-driven methodology 12 Mondawmin to South Baltimore Baltimore City 7 considering factors identified as 13 Rogers Avenue to City Hall Baltimore City 8 important to the region by the Plan 14 Mondawmin to Reisterstown Baltimore City, Baltimore County 10 Commission. The 16 measures address 15 Mondawmin to Northwest Hospital Baltimore City, Baltimore County 8 factors such as access to transit and 16 Ellicott City to Convention Center Baltimore City and County, Howard County 12 jobs for vulnerable populations, 17 West Baltimore to Hopkins Bayview Baltimore City 6 existing transit resources, and alignment with projected future job 18 Sparrows Point to Hopkins Bayview Baltimore City, Baltimore County 6 and population growth. An initial 19 State Center to Hopkins Bayview Baltimore City 5 prioritization grouped corridors into 20 Walbrook Junction to Berea Baltimore City 5 early-, mid-, or long-term opportunities 21 Laurel to Halethorpe Baltimore County, Howard County 13 based on an equal weighting of 22 Mondawmin to Hopkins Bayview Baltimore City 11 all 16 measures. These results were 23 Halethorpe to UM Transit Center Baltimore City, Baltimore County 6 then modified based on feedback from Commissioners, stakeholders, 24 BWI Airport to Greenbelt Metro Station Anne Arundel County 13 and public outreach efforts. Figure 25 BWI Airport to Columbia Town Center Anne Arundel County, Howard County 15 3-2 shows the prioritization process 26 Odenton to Clarksville Anne Arundel County, Howard County 17 applied to the corridors. 27 Ellicott City to Silver Spring Howard County 12 28 Annapolis to Union Station Anne Arundel County 12 29 Bel Air to Edgewood Harford County 9 30 Ellicott City to BWI Airport Anne Arundel County, Howard County 14

24 25 Network Improvements and Corridors Technical Report Regional Transit Corridors

Prioritization Methodology for vulnerable populations (Table Prioritization Groups Corridors, and Long-Term Opportunity The prioritization analysis considers 3-2). More detailed descriptions of Some of the corridors in the Plan Corridors based on the total route measures addressing 16 key questions individual measure methodologies are are ready for early investment, while score produced by the prioritization selected to gauge a corridor’s available in Appendix II: Prioritization others have lower existing demand methodology. The proposed readiness for transit improvements Methodologies and results for for transit but are anticipated to have prioritization was then presented to and its potential to improve access individual corridors are included in increased transit demand in the stakeholders for consideration and to jobs and other opportunities Appendix I: Corridor Profiles. future. The Regional Transit Corridors modified based on their feedback. The are categorized as Early Opportunity final corridor prioritization groups are Table 3-2 Corridors, Mid-Term Opportunity shown in Table 3-3. Evaluation Measures Used in Corridor Prioritization Process

Evaluation Table 3-3 Issue Addressed How Results Are Reported Measure Final Prioritization Groups Does this corridor address a current Gap Yes/no* or future transit gap? Existing Plans Is the corridor in existing plans? Yes/no* Early Opportunity Mid-Term Opportunity Long-Term Opportunity Improve Does the corridor improve existing Count of routes which could be improved Morgan State Univ. Convention Center Service service? 1 5 Glen Burnie to to South Baltimore to Middle River 3 Transfer How many transit routes can you Annapolis Count of intersecting transit routes Potential transfer to? Glen Burnie to Towson to South Glen Burnie to 2 8 4 Supportive Is the surrounding land use transit South Baltimore Baltimore % of corridor with transit supportive land use Bowie Land Use supportive? Towson to UM North Plaza to UM Towson to Hunt How many existing jobs are 6 9 7 Existing Jobs Total jobs per mile within ½ mile of corridor Transit Center Transit Center Valley accessible to the corridor? Mondawmin to White Marsh to 12 Fallston to Population Number of residents accessible to Total population per mile within ½ mile of South Baltimore 10 Johns Hopkins Access the corridor? corridor 11 Aberdeen Proving Rogers Avenue to Hospital Ground Long Work Does corridor serve workers with % of workers with access to the corridor that 13 City Hall Mondawmin to Commutes long commutes? have commutes longer than 45 minutes 14 Laurel to Reisterstown 21 Percentage of minority population % of population with access to corridor that is Ellicott City to Halethorpe Minority Access 16 within the corridor? non-white and/or Hispanic Convention Center Mondawmin to Odenton to 15 26 Low-Income Percentage of low-income % of households with access to the corridor with West Baltimore to Northwest Hospital Clarksville 17 Access population within the corridor? incomes less than twice the Federal poverty line Hopkins Bayview Mondawmin to 22 Annapolis to Union Zero-Car 28 Percentage of zero-car ownership % of households with access to corridor that Sparrows Point to Hopkins Bayview Station Household 18 within the corridor? have no cars Hopkins Bayview Halethorpe to UM Access 23 Bel Air to Transit Center 29 Percentage of seniors within the % of population with access to corridor that are State Center to Edgewood Senior Access 19 corridor? seniors Hopkins Bayview BWI Airport to 24 Ellicott City to BWI Disabled Percentage of people with % of population with access to corridor that has Greenbelt 30 Walbrook Junction Airport Access disabilities within the corridor? a disability 20 to Berea BWI Airport to How many future jobs are Total projected jobs per mile within ½ mile of Future Jobs accessible to the corridor? corridor Ellicott City to Silver 25 Columbia Town 27 Center Supportive Is the surrounding zoning transit Spring % of corridor with transit supportive zoning Zoning supportive? Growth Area Is the corridor within a growth area? % of corridor in State Incentive Program Area

*Corridor must receive a “yes” to proceed in prioritization process.

26 27 Network Improvements and Corridors Technical Report Regional Transit Corridors Regional Transit Corridors Subject to future feasibility analysis and local jurisdiction support Early Opportunity Corridors Early Opportunity Early Opportunity Corridors (Figure 3-3) have been selected for their potential Morgan State Univ. to South 1 to benefit the highest number of Baltimore people, jobs, and households in the 2 Glen Burnie to South Baltimore region in the short term. They include major travel corridors within Baltimore 6 Towson to UM Transit Center City, and commuter bus links from 12 Mondawmin to South Baltimore the suburbs to the region’s job 13 Rogers Avenue to City Hall centers. All these corridors currently exhibit strong market demand and 16 Ellicott City to Convention Center represent critical links in the regional 17 West Baltimore to Hopkins Bayview transit system. Most serve areas with 18 Sparrows Point to Hopkins Bayview a high density of jobs and population 19 State Center to Hopkins Bayview as well as high concentrations of vulnerable populations. The results 20 Walbrook Junction to Berea of the evaluation measures for all the 27 Ellicott City to Silver Spring corridors are shown in Appendix I: Corridor Profiles.

Figure 3-3 28 Early Opportunity Corridors 29 Network Improvements and Corridors Technical Report Regional Transit Corridors Regional Transit Corridors Subject to future feasibility analysis and local jurisdiction support Mid-Term Opportunity Corridors Mid-Term Opportunity Mid-Term Opportunity Corridors (Figure 3-4) are also selected for their Convention Center to Middle 5 potential to benefit a high number of River people, jobs, and households in the 8 Towson to South Baltimore region, however these tend to score North Plaza to UM Transit lower in certain evaluation measures 9 than Early Opportunity Corridors. Center Mid-Term Opportunity Corridors are White Marsh to Johns Hopkins 10 concentrated in Baltimore City and Hospital County, except for two that connect 14 Mondawmin to Reisterstown BWI Airport with important population Mondawmin to Northwest 15 and job centers in Howard and Hospital Anne Arundel counties. Mid-Term Mondawmin to Hopkins Opportunity Corridors tend to have 22 lower concentrations of vulnerable Bayview Halethorpe to UM Transit populations than Early Opportunity 23 Corridors despite similar population Center and job densities. 24 BWI Airport to Greenbelt BWI Airport to Columbia Town 25 Center

Figure 3-4 30 Mid-Term Opportunity Corridors 31 Network Improvements and Corridors Technical Report Regional Transit Corridors Regional Transit Corridors Subject to future feasibility analysis and local jurisdiction support Long-Term Opportunity Corridors Long-Term Opportunity Corridors Long-Term Opportunity (Figure 3-5) are selected for their 3 Glen Burnie to Annapolis potential to benefit areas where transit demand is expected to increase over 4 Glen Burnie to Bowie the next 25 years. These corridors 7 Towson to Hunt Valley are concentrated on the region’s Fallston to Aberdeen Proving 11 peripheries and tend to connect areas Ground with low existing densities of residents, 21 Laurel to Halethorpe jobs, and vulnerable populations relative to the region’s urban core. 26 Odenton to Clarksville However, much of the region’s 28 Annapolis to Union Station long‑term growth is projected to occur 29 Bel Air to Edgewood in these peripheral areas, and transit markets along these corridors are 30 Ellicott City to BWI Airport expected to grow accordingly.

Figure 3-5 32 Long-Term Opportunity Corridors 33 Network Improvements and Corridors Technical Report Regional Transit Corridors

Knowing which factors are particularly Next Steps for All Transit Readiness relevant to a place type or corridor is ——————————————————————————— helpful to identify strategies to make Prioritization Groups Transit Readiness describes the ——————————————————————————— them more transit-ready over time. degree to which a place has the land Local jurisdictions should evaluate an Now that the corridors have been identified, a feasibility study must be uses, transit-access infrastructure, area’s transit readiness by considering conducted to determine the degree of improvements needed to implement and concentrations of people that the five topics below. the corridors. This process is described in Figure 3-6. generate transit demand and allow people to comfortably and directly 1. Destinations along the Path of Travel. access transit service. In the Central Figure 3-6 This factor describes the degree to Maryland region, the degree to which Next Steps for Regional Corridors which a transit service offers direct places are transit-ready often has to do ——————————————————————————— connections to high-demand places. with what was the most common kind This factor describes the degree to of transportation when the area was which a transit service offers direct developed. connections to high-demand places. Places which naturally generate transit For example, Baltimore City’s intricate trips act as anchors for a transit route, network of connected streets in its and their proximity to transit stops is pre-industrial neighborhoods around one factor that determines how direct the Inner Harbor were built when and convenient a transit service will be. most people walked to and from home, work, daily shopping, and 2. Density and Mix of Land Uses. This services. When the first commercially factor describes the degree to which operated electric streetcars were a place has the density of people introduced to the city in 1885, radial and destinations to generate transit arterials were extended to create demand. Also worth considering the suburban neighborhoods west is whether a place’s mix of land and north from jobs near the harbor. uses will generate transit demand Most of the city is built and organized at many hours of the day, or only Jurisdictions, in coordination with Next Steps for Mid-/Long-Term at transit-compatible scales, with during concentrated travel peaks. For MDOT MTA and the LOTS, can take Opportunity Corridors densities above 15 residents or jobs per instance, an office park might house steps in the short-term to direct transit acre, connected blocks, sidewalks, and many jobs, but only generate trips investment to Early Opportunity • Build transit ridership by neighborhood commercial centers. Corridors, as described below. implementing new service or during typical commute hours, while a dense street of shops and apartments improving existing service The parts of the region that developed will generate transit demand all day Next Steps for • Implement incremental transit when the automobile was more and into the evening. Early Opportunity Corridors priority infrastructure so that existing prevalent are mostly built to a scale transit is faster and more reliable that is easier to travel by car. Residences 3. Connected Street and Path Network. • Start corridor studies to assess • Review and change land use and and businesses are more spread out; In many settings, most transit riders alternatives that best match the zoning ordinances to be more moderate detours are less significant will access the service by walking to it. corridor’s needs transit supportive to people driving than people walking, In order to do so, they need a dense • Enhance existing service • Facilitate better pedestrian, so the street network tends to be more and connected network of streets and • Evaluate and install/construct bicycle, and microtransit access disconnected and less direct; and paths that they can safely walk on to transit priority infrastructure for first mile/last mile travel to the large areas in commercial centers are reach their ultimate destination. • Enhance multimodal access to existing and potential future transit devoted to parking. stops and stations corridors

34 35 Network Improvements and Corridors Technical Report Regional Transit Corridors

4. Comfortable Environment. In some 5. Programs and Incentives. The locations, a street or path might exist physical characteristics and for people to walk on to access transit, concentrations of people and but aspects of the environment make destinations that make a place Programs it difficult to use, uninviting, or unsafe. transit-ready typically do not happen Destinations Density of Connected and The factors making it uncomfortable by chance, especially in places that Corridor Along Path Uses Network Comfort incentives Fallston to Aberdeen can be loud, high‑volume or were developed when automobiles 11      high‑speed traffic; a high frequency were more prevalent. The adoption of Proving Ground Mondawmin to South of heavily used driveways crossing the zoning that aligns with the provision 12 Baltimore      path; a lack of lighting; a lack of safe of transit and the creation of programs Rogers Avenue to City 13 and convenient crosswalks; or building and incentives that encourage dense Hall      frontages that lack pedestrian‑level land uses with inviting and connected Mondawmin to 14 design. pedestrian amenities are crucial to Reisterstown      enabling the changes that increase Mondawmin to 15 transit readiness. Northwest Hospital      Ellicott City to 16 Convention Center      Table 3-4 West Baltimore to 17      Overall Transit Readiness by Corridor Hopkins Bayview Sparrows Point to 18 Hopkins Bayview      State Center to Hopkins 19 Bayview      Walbrook Junction to 20      Programs Berea Destinations Density of Connected and 21 Laurel to Halethorpe Corridor Along Path Uses Network Comfort incentives      Morgan State Univ. to Mondawmin to Hopkins 1 22      South Baltimore      Bayview Glen Burnie to South Halethorpe to UM 2 23      Baltimore      Transit Center Glen Burnie to BWI Airport to 3 24      Annapolis      Greenbelt BWI Airport to Columbia 4 Glen Burnie to Bowie 25      Town Ccenter      Convention Center to 5 26 Odenton to Clarksville Middle River           Towson to UM Transit Ellicott City to Silver 6 27      Center      Spring Annapolis to Union 7 Towson to Hunt Valley 28      Station      Towson to South 8 29 Bel Air to Edgewood Baltimore           North Plaza to UM Ellicott City to BWI 9 30      Transit Center      Airport White Marsh to Johns 10 Hopkins Hospital       Meets Conditions  Meets Conditions but Needs Improvements  Does Not Meet Conditions

36 37 Network Improvements and Corridors Technical Report Regional Transit Corridors

Transit Readiness Case Study Integrated Planning of a Transit Corridor in Charlotte, NC

The LYNX Blue Line in Charlotte, Centers and Corridors plan, which North Carolina, opened in 2007, is was updated in 1998 as the 2025 the first light rail service in the state. Integrated Transit/Land-Use Plan. In planning a northern extension From these plans, the city adopted to UNC Charlotte (which ultimately transit-oriented zoning and urban opened in 2018), the city knew that design guidelines to channel New construction at the Blue Line’s J.W. Clay Boulevard station. it would take a major shift in land private investment toward the (Photo credit: Kittelson and Associates.) use and circulation patterns to desired environment in transit deliver on its envisioned economic station influence areas. The city also Getting out in front of investment neighborhoods in the area. The development and mobility goals. created a Development Response decisions with an area plan and at‑grade intersection saved the Transitioning suburban patterns to Team and established processes an urban design team capable of state of North Carolina about walkable transit-ready places would to support collaboration with negotiating solutions was particularly $25 million. National retail chains require full cooperation with actors developers, landowners, and state important for the stations near upgraded local street infrastructure outside of the local transit agency. highway officials, thereby assuring UNC Charlotte. The Development to be comfortable for walking, that new investment would be Response Team offered NCDOT an bicycling, and short trips, reducing Charlotte’s transit-ready vision transit-compatible in land use, alternative to a proposed $50 million arterial road impact. has its genesis in the city’s 1994 urban form, and site design. interchange project to eliminate a problematic weave of North Tryon The Development Response Street and University City Boulevard concept recognized the need for (Routes 29 and 49). The design was the city to have technical resources incompatible with the emerging in place to be opportunistic transit-oriented context, area and nimble, able to quickly and connectivity, and TOD. Facilitating effectively inform and leverage a dialogue between NCDOT and investments from partner agencies area developers during a single and the private sector. Beyond work session led to the developers this, the city also deploys targeted agreeing to build the team’s infrastructure improvements proposed network of local streets, in transit station areas, which is thereby reducing point-based particularly important in less robust congestion at the interchange site. markets. This combination of clear city goals, guidance of private The now-built street network, investment, and alignment of public coupled with changes in infrastructure investment has proven allowable land use, is producing successful in creating transit-ready transit‑compatible employment, origins and destinations and serving shopping, and residential them with high-quality transit. The proposed network of local streets around Charlotte’s Blue Line extension.

38 39 Network Improvements and Corridors Technical Report Regional Transit Corridors

corridor, the findings of the corridor Cost per mile Mode Description Example Regional Transit feasibility study, and participation from (2019 dollars) Corridor Characteristics stakeholders. ——————————————————————————— Possible modes, service frequency Minimum Service Levels Rail-based transit system operating in dedicated right- $30 million to Light Rail and span, and methods of prioritizing Table 3-6, on the next spread, describes of‑way using short one- to $650 million transit are provided in this section potential service characteristics by three‑car trains. for illustrative purposes. All of these corridor, including minimum span characteristics would be investigated and frequency. The table applies MDOT MTA Light Rail during the corridor feasibility study one of three potential service levels phase, and final interventions would to each corridor based on transit Rail-based transit system market demand, transit readiness, and operating in streets in mixed be selected based on final mode $25 million to Streetcar traffic, typically using single‑car and alignment selection, levels of other local context factors. Corridors $100 million service, cost-benefit analysis, and local traveling through urban areas with high trains making frequent stops in urban areas. jurisdiction support. densities of residents and jobs may have transit service 24 hours per day DC Streetcar Modes and frequencies of 10 minutes or better The Regional Transit Corridors do not during weekday peak periods, whereas Rail-based transit system with assume modes or service levels and corridors traveling along highways or dedicated right-of-way and Regional all‑day, relatively frequent service $4 million to do not define specific alignments freeways surrounded by lower densities Rail in both directions but typically $200 million or routes. Rather, the identified of residents and jobs may have transit with stations spaced at least a corridors highlight areas with transit service for 14 to 18 hours per day and few miles apart. need and potential for investment frequencies of 20 to 30 minutes during Denver RTD A Line without rigidly defining the future of weekday peak periods. These service Rail-based transit system Central Maryland’s transit network. The levels are only planning estimates that designed primarily for peak-hour one-way service from suburban Regional Transit Corridors prioritized would be subject to further analysis and Commuter $3 million to areas, with distances of several through this plan could use any of the review during the corridor feasibility Rail $40 million study phase, with implemented service miles or more between stations, MDOT MTA MARC Train following modes of transit in Table 3-5. to a city center or central The appropriate mode will depend on levels subject to local jurisdiction business district. the prioritization and context of each support. Bus-based transit system with dedicated lanes or right-of-way, Bus Rapid $2 million to traffic signal priority, off-board Transit $170 million fare payment, level boarding Table 3-5 platforms and enhanced stations. Potential Regional Transit Corridor Modes WMATA Metroway

Bus-based transit system Cost per mile Mode Description Example operating on major arterial (2019 dollars) Arterial streets and roads in mixed traffic $1 million to Rapid with transit signal priority and $20 million Rail-based transit system Transit operating exclusively in off-board fare payment, making dedicated right-of-way separated stops at enhanced stations. Minneapolis Metro Transit $150 million Heavy Rail from all other traffic using A Line to $3 billion multi‑car trains powered by an electric third rail, making stops at Photos are courtesy of each transit agency. high‑level boarding platforms. MDOT MTA Metro Subway

40 41 Network Improvements and Corridors Technical Report Regional Transit Corridors

Table 3-6 Transit Priority Improvements This section first defines transit priority Minimum Levels of Service by Corridor In June 2019, MDOT MTA published improvements in four categories: the Transit Priority Toolkit, which right-of-way, priority infrastructure and

Minimum Span Minimum Frequency identifies physical and technology technology, stop improvement, and treatments throughout the Core facilities (Table 3-7). Then, it estimates Peak Off-Peak Weekday Saturday Sunday Minimum Minimum Bus system that would address bus these improvements’ potential time Corridor Name (hours (hours (hours per Frequency Frequency per day) per day) day) travel delays and reliability, as well savings and costs (Table 3-8). Finally, (minutes) (minutes) as pedestrian and bicycle safety. The it identifies which treatments would 1 Morgan State University to South Baltimore 24 14-18 14-18 20-30 30-60 Plan expands upon the Transit Priority benefit each corridor (Table 3-9). 2 Glen Burnie to South Baltimore 14-18 14-18 14-18 20-30 30-60 Toolkit by identifying infrastructure These investments will be required 3 Glen Burnie to Annapolis 24 24 24 10 15-20 improvements to improve transit to fully support successful all-day, 4 Glen Burnie to Bowie 24 24 24 10 15-20 travel speeds and service reliability in high‑frequency transit service proposed 5 Convention Center to Middle River 14-18 14-18 14-18 15-20 30-60 corridors across Central Maryland. for the Regional Transit Corridors. 6 Towson to UM Transit Center 24 24 24 10 15-20 7 Towson to Hunt Valley 24 24 24 10 15-20 8 Towson to South Baltimore 24 24 24 10 15-20 Table 3-7 9 North Plaza to UM Transit Center 14-18 14-18 14-18 20-30 30-60 Transit Priority Improvements 10 White Marsh to Johns Hopkins Hosp. 24 24 24 10 15-20 11 Fallston to Aberdeen Proving Ground 24 24 24 10 15-20 Transit Priority Description Example Image Improvement 12 Mondawmin to South Baltimore 24 14-18 14-18 15-20 30-60 13 Rogers Avenue to City Hall 24 14-18 14-18 15-20 30-60 Dedicated lanes are signed or marked for exclusive transit use. They may be 14 Mondawmin to Reisterstown 24 14-18 14-18 15-20 30-60 on a separate right-of-way, concurrent 15 Mondawmin to Northwest Hospital 24 24 24 10 15-20 with adjacent traffic, or contraflow Dedicated with adjacent traffic. Dedicated 16 Ellicott City to Convention Center 24 14-18 14-18 15-20 30-60 lanes or bus lanes may also be shared with 17 West Baltimore to Hopkins Bayview 24 24 24 10 15-20 Right‑of‑way bicyclists and emergency vehicles. 18 Sparrows Point to Hopkins Bayview 24 24 24 10 15-20 Busways are dedicated right-of-way 19 State Center to Hopkins Bayview 24 14-18 14-18 15-20 30-60 physically separated from other traffic by curbs, medians, or other barriers. 20 Walbrook Junction to Berea 24 24 24 10 15-20 21 Laurel to Halethorpe 24 24 24 10 15-20 Peak-only bus lanes are used exclusively by buses and turning 22 Mondawmin to Hopkins Bayview 24 14-18 14-18 20-30 30-60 vehicles during specified times of the 23 Halethorpe to UM Transit Center 24 14-18 14-18 15-20 30-60 Peak-only bus day. During off-peak periods the lane 24 BWI Airport to Greenbelt 14-18 14-18 14-18 20-30 30-60 lanes is used as a general travel lane or a parking lane. Existing travel lanes may

25 BWI Airport to Columbia Town Center 14-18 14-18 14-18 20-30 30-60 Right-of-way be repurposed during peak hours with 26 Odenton to Clarksville 14-18 14-18 14-18 20-30 30-60 signage and pavement markings. 27 Ellicott City to Silver Spring 14-18 14-18 14-18 20-30 30-60 On highways, freeways, and 28 Annapolis to Union Station 14-18 14-18 14-18 20-30 30-60 higher‑speed roads, the shoulder can 29 Bel Air to Edgewood 24 14-18 14-18 20-30 30-60 be used as a bus on shoulder lane. The shoulder is designated as transit‑only, 30 Ellicott City to BWI Airport 14-18 14-18 14-18 20-30 30-60 Bus on allowing buses to move through shoulder lanes congested corridors without delay. Projects may include repurposing existing shoulders during peak hours with signage and pavement markings.

42 43 Network Improvements and Corridors Technical Report Regional Transit Corridors

Table 3-7 Transit Priority Description Example Image Right-of-Way Transit Priority Improvements (continued) Improvement Stop optimization is a process for bus routes with closely spaced Transit Priority Description Example Image or underutilized stops (as shown Improvement Stop below). Targeted stops are relocated See diagram below optimization Driveway access management is or eliminated in order to optimize a process by which two or more passenger boarding patterns with driveways and access roads are transit travel times. consolidated into one location, or left turns onto major roads are prohibited Curb extensions at bus stops or Driveway through medians or other barriers. At stations are also known as bus bulbs access the location pictured above, a driveway or boarding bulbs. The bus stop management curb cut was closed and replaced Curb boarding area “bulbs out” to the travel with a bus stop. Access management extension lane allowing the bus to stop in the Right-of-way can improve safety for buses and travel lane. This may also shorten the Photo credit: Google Street pedestrians by reducing the number crossing distance for pedestrians at View of potential conflict points with other intersections traffic. With level or near-level boarding at Stop improvements Stop An intersection queue jump consists stops or stations, the height of the bus of a short transit-only lane prior to platform is raised above typical curb an intersection. General traffic may height to minimize the vertical gap not turn right on red, and buses have between the pavement and the bus Level boarding a bus‑only traffic signal. As a bus floor. This allows patrons to get on and approaches the intersection, it receives off the bus without a step up or down, Intersection a dedicated signal to proceed (pictured speeding boarding and facilitating queue jump at right as the white line beneath the boarding for those with disabilities or “Van Mall Transit Center” sign), while with strollers. general traffic waits at the red light. The bus can then jump the queue, proceed through the intersection ahead of Photo credit: Amanda Cowan/ the adjacent vehicles, and seamlessly The Columbian merge into the subsequent traffic lanes.

Transit signal priority uses technology for communication between a traffic signal and an approaching bus to give Transit signal priority to the approaching transit priority vehicle. This is typically the addition of a few seconds to a green light, or the reduction of a few seconds to a red light.

Ramp meters are traffic signals Priority infrastructure and technology Priority infrastructure installed on freeway and highway on-ramps that limit merging to one vehicle at a time. Ramp queue jumps Ramp queue are sections of a transit-only lane or jump high-occupancy vehicle lane prior to a ramp meter. Lane markings and signage allow buses to bypass other Photo credit: Google Street vehicles waiting to merge onto the View highway, continuing without delay. Stop Optimization

44 45 Network Improvements and Corridors Technical Report Regional Transit Corridors

Table 3-7 Transit Priority Description Example Image Right-of-Way Transit Priority Improvements (continued) Improvement A terminal is a facility designed for transit vehicles to lay over between Transit Priority Description Example Image trips. For buses, a terminal is typically Improvement an off-street loop that enables operators to turn around at the end of Off-board fare payment is a system for a route. For trains, a terminal may be pre-paying for transit before boarding Terminal a siding, a short track at the side of a a bus or train. Using a ticket vending rail line, where trains reverse direction Facilities machine at a transit stop, customers at the end of a trip. Terminals may Off-board fare may validate their electronic fare be equipped with shelters, ticket payment card or purchase a ticket using cash vending machines, or other customer or a credit/debit card. Removing fare amenities. payment, especially cash payments, from the boarding process reduces Photo Credit: NYC DOT M86 time spent at stops. Select Bus Service Progress Table 3-8 on the next spread Report STRATEGIES summarizes these transit priority All-door boarding is a system that ! Improve Bus Speed and improvements, their potential time allows customers to board at every Reliability set of doors of a bus or train rather savings, and their estimated costs. than at only the front door. Off-board • Implement targeted Stop improvements Stop fare payment is usually employed to On the subsequent spread, Table 3-9 investments, such as: dedicated facilitate all-door boarding. If fares All-door identifies potential improvements bus lanes, transit signal are not paid off-board, customers boarding prioritization, traffic signal may validate their electronic farecard for each corridor based on existing when boarding or purchase a ticket conditions and local context, including replacement and retiming, on-board using cash or a credit/debit curb management, all-door Photo Credit: Institute factors such as roadway design, land card. All-door boarding speeds the for Transportation and use, traffic congestion, transit stop boarding, and off-board fare boarding process, reducing time spent Development Policy spacing, and availability of transit collection at stops. facilities. For example, bus on shoulder • Introduce limited-stop service A transit hub is the co-location of would be most appropriate for where appropriate two or more transit stops to enable corridors that include highways or • Ensure consistent enforcement passengers to quickly and efficiently of bus lane and bus stop transfer between transit routes and freeways with existing shoulders that modes. They are typically located at could be used or modified for use by violations town centers, rail stations, or other transit vehicles. • Coordinate with local high-activity locations. Transit hubs Transit hub jurisdictions to minimize the may be equipped with bicycle and Further refinement of these Transit impact of construction projects Facilities vehicle parking, shelters, ticket on bus services vending machines, or other customer Priority Improvements would be amenities. Transit hubs often provide investigated during the corridor • When existing buses are retired, space for transit vehicles to lay over feasibility study phase, and final replace with low-floor vehicles between trips and for operators to take interventions would be selected breaks. based on final mode and alignment selection, levels of service, cost-benefit analysis, and local jurisdiction support.

46 47 Network Improvements and Corridors Technical Report Regional Transit Corridors

Table 3-8 Potential Time Savings and Approximate Costs for Transit Priority Improvements

Transit Priority Transit Priority Potential Time Savings Estimated Costs Improvement Potential Time Savings Estimated Costs Improvement For right-of-way acquisition, physical barrier Approximately 1 percent reduction construction, and roadway widening: $4 to in travel time for a 10 percent Costs of eliminating bus stops are minimal. reduction in the number of stops When relocating a bus stop, constructing $11 million per lane-mile Stop Dedicated Between 4 percent and 32 percent a new concrete bus pad is the most lanes or reduction in travel time during optimization For repurposed existing travel lanes with Relocating stops to the far side expensive infrastructure element at Right‑of‑way peak periods signage, pavement markings, and red of an intersection can save 4 to 5 approximately $15,000 paint or tinted asphalt overlay: $350,000 to seconds per stop $750,000 per lane-mile Not yet well known for raised-curb Projects may include repurposing existing level boarding, but boarding times Between 4 percent and 32 percent Peak-only bus travel lanes during peak hours with signage on low-floor buses are 0.11 to 0.7 Approximately $50,000 to construct raised reduction in travel time during lane and pavement markings: $50,000 to Level boarding seconds faster per ambulatory platforms at each stop and $20,000 per peak periods $75,000 per lane-mile passenger and 5 seconds faster bus to install guidance equipment for each passenger who would Right-of-way Varies based on the degree of Projects may include repurposing existing require a lift Bus on congestion in the general‑purpose shoulders with signage and pavement Ranges from approximately $20,000 for shoulder lane and how many miles markings: $50,000 to $75,000 per On a typical city street with a temporary boarding platform made of congestion extends lane‑mile volumes of 300 to 500 vehicles Curb extension durable plastic to approximately $100,000 Varies based on the frequency per lane per hour, a curb extension Driveway Varies based on length of driveway and for a curb extension constructed with of driveways and the amount of may save 5 seconds per stop access adjacent roadway conditions (open/closed concrete

activity controlled or reduced due improvements Stop management section, sidewalks, buffers, etc.) to closures Off-board fare payment machines cost approximately $20,000 each; there are For projects that include right-of-way typically additional costs associated with acquisition and roadway widening: connecting to electric and internet utilities $80,000 to $200,000 per 100 feet of turn Off-board Between 1.1 and 2.5 fewer seconds that vary by location lane fare payment of boarding time per passenger and All-door (a reduction of 40 percent to 56 Transit agencies employ an average of Between 5 percent and 15 percent For queue jump traffic signals: $5,000 to Intersection boarding percent in boarding time) one full-time equivalent fare inspector per reduction in travel time for buses $15,000 based on the type of detection queue jump 2,000 daily riders; otherwise, electronic through intersections (e.g., loop or video) farecard validators must be installed at rear doors at a cost of approximately $5,000 per Lower-cost projects may include unit repurposing of existing travel lanes with signage and pavement markings: $50,000 Varies based on mode(s) and to $75,000 per lane-mile number of converging routes. Sometimes, diverting routes to a Up to 10 percent reduction in single transit hub may increase Transit signal travel time and up to 50 percent Ranges from $15,000 to $25,000 per the travel time for passengers priority reduction in delay at the targeted intersection Transit hub but offer better transfers. Transit Varies widely based on design and whether intersections and Terminal customers perceive a minute right-way-way acquisition is required For right-of-way acquisition, physical barrier facilities waiting to be longer than a minute Facilities construction, and roadway widening: $4 to riding; increasing the comfort Varies based on the degree of $11 million per lane-mile and decreasing the length of Priority infrastructure and technology Priority infrastructure Ramp queue congestion to enter limited access transfers can benefit passengers jump roadway and how many feet Projects may include repurposing existing even if overall in-vehicle travel time congestion extends travel lanes/shoulder with signage and increases slightly. pavement markings: $50,000 to $75,000 per lane-mile

48 49 Network Improvements and Corridors Technical Report Regional Transit Corridors

Table 3-9 Potential Transit Priority Improvements by Corridor

Right-of-Way Priority Infrastructure and Technology Dedicated Driveway Peak-Only Bus Bus on Intersection Transit SIgnal Ramp Queue Lanes or Access Corridor Name Lane Shoulder Queue Jump Priority Jump Right-of-Way Management Corridor Name

1 Morgan State University to South Baltimore x 1 Morgan State University to South Baltimore x x 2 Glen Burnie to South Baltimore x x 2 Glen Burnie to South Baltimore x x 3 Glen Burnie to Annapolis x x 3 Glen Burnie to Annapolis x x 4 Glen Burnie to Bowie x x 4 Glen Burnie to Bowie x x 5 Convention Center to Middle River x 5 Convention Center to Middle River x x x 6 Towson to UM Transit Center x 6 Towson to UM Transit Center x x 7 Towson to Hunt Valley x x 7 Towson to Hunt Valley x x 8 Towson to South Baltimore x 8 Towson to South Baltimore x x 9 North Plaza to UM Transit Center x x 9 North Plaza to UM Transit Center x x 10 White Marsh to Johns Hopkins Hosp. x x x 10 White Marsh to Johns Hopkins Hosp. x x 11 Fallston to Aberdeen Proving Ground x x 11 Fallston to Aberdeen Proving Ground x x 12 Mondawmin to South Baltimore x 12 Mondawmin to South Baltimore x x 13 Rogers Avenue to City Hall x 13 Rogers Avenue to City Hall x x 14 Mondawmin to Reisterstown x x x 14 Mondawmin to Reisterstown x x 15 Mondawmin to Northwest Hospital x x x 15 Mondawmin to Northwest Hospital x x 16 Ellicott City to Convention Center x x 16 Ellicott City to Convention Center x x 17 West Baltimore to Hopkins Bayview x 17 West Baltimore to Hopkins Bayview x x 18 Sparrows Point to Hopkins Bayview x x 18 Sparrows Point to Hopkins Bayview x x 19 State Center to Hopkins Bayview x 19 State Center to Hopkins Bayview x x 20 Walbrook Junction to Berea x 20 Walbrook Junction to Berea x x 21 Laurel to Halethorpe x x x x 21 Laurel to Halethorpe x x 22 Mondawmin to Hopkins Bayview x 22 Mondawmin to Hopkins Bayview x x 23 Halethorpe to UM Transit Center x 23 Halethorpe to UM Transit Center x x 24 BWI Airport to Greenbelt x x 24 BWI Airport to Greenbelt x x x 25 BWI Airport to Columbia Town Center x x 25 BWI Airport to Columbia Town Center x x x 26 Odenton to Clarksville x 26 Odenton to Clarksville x 27 Ellicott City to Silver Spring x 27 Ellicott City to Silver Spring x 28 Annapolis to Union Station x 28 Annapolis to Union Station x 29 Bel Air to Edgewood x 29 Bel Air to Edgewood x x 30 Ellicott City to BWI Airport x 30 Ellicott City to BWI Airport x

50 51 Network Improvements and Corridors Technical Report Regional Transit Corridors

demand, transit readiness, potential Next Steps for Regional alignments, potential modes, order of Transit Corridors magnitude costs, and environmental ——————————————————————————— impact of each alternative. Before transit improvements can be implemented in a corridor, the An important element of a feasibility specific alignment, mode, service study is the identification of funding levels, technologies, and design of sources. Federal funding sources facilities and infrastructure must be often have specific requirements determined. These details are not for the planning process; project dictated by the Plan; the Regional sponsors should be aware of those Transit Corridors do not assume modes requirements to ensure eligibility. or service levels and do not define specific alignments or routes. Rather, Extensive improvements may the identified corridors highlight areas require an alternatives analysis and with transit need and potential for environmental assessment, followed investment without rigidly defining by preliminary engineering, final the future of Central Maryland’s transit design, and construction. Moderate network. Although this Plan outlines improvements may require analysis potential transit priority improvement of existing service improvement tools and treatments, the detailed concepts to evaluate benefits and study of all alternatives will be refine concepts, followed by an initiated, conducted, and finalized by implementation plan. For simple the relevant regional and local leaders improvements, jurisdictions may only and transit agencies separately for need an implementation plan to each corridor. It is the responsibility of implement changes on the corridor. these regional and local stakeholders, with public support, to create solutions The next steps for study, design, and and plan specific transit services. implementation of improvements and assets for the Regional Transit The appropriate course of action Corridors may change over time. will vary based on the prioritization The corridors, their extent, and and context of each corridor, as prioritization will be updated with well as the stakeholders involved. the Plan every five years. In the case Initially, coalitions must be formed of changes to a corridor, the course representing the jurisdictional of action following publication of the authorities and transit agencies updated Plan should be revisited. that are relevant to a corridor. Then, the corridors will require feasibility studies to determine the appropriate alternatives for transit improvements given the level of need, local support, potential funding sources, and time frame for implementation. Feasibility studies should evaluate market

52 53 Appendix 1 Corridor Profiles Miles NO. Name Jurisdictions Served within LIST OF CORRIDORS Region 1 Morgan State Univ. to South Baltimore Baltimore City 7 2 Glen Burnie to South Baltimore Anne Arundel County, Baltimore City 7 This table lists each corridor’s name, 3 Glen Burnie to Annapolis Anne Arundel County 17 jurisdictions served, and length, 4 Glen Burnie to Bowie Anne Arundel County 15 ranging from 5 to 17 miles. The 5 Convention Center to Middle River Baltimore City, Baltimore County 11 number associated with each corridor is an identification number; it does 6 Towson to UM Transit Center Baltimore City, Baltimore County 9 not represent priority order. Baltimore 7 Towson to Hunt Valley Baltimore County 7 City is served by 19 corridors, the most 8 Towson to South Baltimore Baltimore City, Baltimore County 13 of any jurisdiction. This appendix 9 North Plaza to UM Transit Center Baltimore City, Baltimore County 11 contains a detailed map and 10 White Marsh to Johns Hopkins Hospital Baltimore City, Baltimore County 10 evaluation of each corridor. 11 Fallston to Aberdeen Proving Ground Harford County 16 12 Mondawmin to South Baltimore Baltimore City 7 13 Rogers Avenue to City Hall Baltimore City 8 14 Mondawmin to Reisterstown Baltimore City, Baltimore County 10 15 Mondawmin to Northwest Hospital Baltimore City, Baltimore County 8 16 Ellicott City to Convention Center Baltimore City and County, Howard County 12 17 West Baltimore to Hopkins Bayview Baltimore City 6 18 Sparrows Point to Hopkins Bayview Baltimore City, Baltimore County 6 19 State Center to Hopkins Bayview Baltimore City 5 20 Walbrook Junction to Berea Baltimore City 5 21 Laurel to Halethorpe Baltimore County, Howard County 13 22 Mondawmin to Hopkins Bayview Baltimore City 11 23 Halethorpe to UM Transit Center Baltimore City, Baltimore County 6 24 BWI Airport to Greenbelt Metro Station Anne Arundel County 13 25 BWI Airport to Columbia Town Center Anne Arundel County, Howard County 15 26 Odenton to Clarksville Anne Arundel County, Howard County 17 27 Ellicott City to Silver Spring Howard County 12 28 Annapolis to Union Station Anne Arundel County 12 29 Bel Air to Edgewood Harford County 9 30 Ellicott City to BWI Airport Anne Arundel County, Howard County 14

1-2 Morgan State Univ. to South Baltimore CORRIDOR 1 Subject to future feasibility analysis and local jurisdiction support

EVALUATION MEASURE RESULT

Gap Does this corridor address a current or future transit gap? (yes/no) YES

Existing Plans Is the corridor in existing plans? (yes/no) YES

Improve Service Does the corridor improve existing service? (count of routes which could be improved) 5

Transfer Potential How many transit routes can you transfer to? (count of intersecting transit routes) 46

Supportive Land Use Is land use transit supportive? (% of corridor with transit supportive land use) 50%

Existing Jobs 16,612 How many existing jobs are accessible to the corridor? (total jobs per mile within ½ mile of corridor) jobs/mi

Population Access 11,257 Number of residents accessible to the corridor? (total population per mile within ½ mile of residents/ corridor) mi

Long Work Commutes Does corridor serve workers with long commutes? 18% (% of workers with access to the corridor that have commutes longer than 45 minutes)

Minority Access Percentage of minority population within the corridor? (% of population with access to 60% corridor that is non-white or Hispanic)

Low-Income Access Percentage of low-income population within the corridor? (% of households with access to 35% the corridor with incomes less than twice the Federal poverty line)

Zero Car Access Percentage of zero car ownership within the corridor? (% of households with access to 32% corridor that have no cars)

Senior Access Percentage of seniors within the corridor? (% of population with access to corridor that are 10% Length: 7 miles seniors) Jurisdictions served: Baltimore City Disabled Access Percentage of people with disabilities within the corridor? (% of population with access to 11% corridor that has a disability)

Future Jobs 28,963 How many future jobs are accessible to the corridor? (total projected jobs (2045) per mile within ½ mile of corridor) jobs/mi

Supportive Zoning Is zoning transit supportive? (% of corridor with transit supportive zoning) 85%

Growth Area Is the corridor within a growth area? (% of corridor in State Incentive Program Area) 93%

1-3 Glen Burnie to South Baltimore CORRIDOR 2 Subject to future feasibility analysis and local jurisdiction support

EVALUATION MEASURE RESULT

Gap Does this corridor address a current or future transit gap? (yes/no) YES

Existing Plans Is the corridor in existing plans? (yes/no) YES

Improve Service Does the corridor improve existing service? (count of routes which could be improved) 2

Transfer Potential How many transit routes can you transfer to? (count of intersecting transit routes) 7

Supportive Land Use Is land use transit supportive? (% of corridor with transit supportive land use) 8%

Existing Jobs 1,741 How many existing jobs are accessible to the corridor? (total jobs per mile within ½ mile of corridor) jobs/mi

Population Access 3,789 Number of residents accessible to the corridor? (total population per mile within ½ mile of residents/ corridor) mi

Long Work Commutes Does corridor serve workers with long commutes? 17% (% of workers with access to the corridor that have commutes longer than 45 minutes)

Minority Access Percentage of minority population within the corridor? (% of population with access to 45% corridor that is non-white or Hispanic)

Low-Income Access Percentage of low-income population within the corridor? (% of households with access to 35% the corridor with incomes less than twice the Federal poverty line)

Zero Car Access Percentage of zero car ownership within the corridor? (% of households with access to 17% corridor that have no cars)

Senior Access Percentage of seniors within the corridor? (% of population with access to corridor that are 12% Length: 7 miles seniors) Jurisdictions served: Anne Arundel County, Baltimore Disabled Access Percentage of people with disabilities within the corridor? (% of population with access to 14% City corridor that has a disability)

Future Jobs 4,166 How many future jobs are accessible to the corridor? (total projected jobs (2045) per mile within ½ mile of corridor) jobs/mi

Supportive Zoning Is zoning transit supportive? (% of corridor with transit supportive zoning) 79%

Growth Area Is the corridor within a growth area? (% of corridor in State Incentive Program Area) 66%

1-4 Glen Burnie to Annapolis CORRIDOR 3 Subject to future feasibility analysis and local jurisdiction support

EVALUATION MEASURE RESULT

Gap Does this corridor address a current or future transit gap? (yes/no) YES

Existing Plans Is the corridor in existing plans? (yes/no) YES

Improve Service Does the corridor improve existing service? (count of routes which could be improved) 3

Transfer Potential How many transit routes can you transfer to? (count of intersecting transit routes) 15

Supportive Land Use Is land use transit supportive? (% of corridor with transit supportive land use) 6%

Existing Jobs 1,637 How many existing jobs are accessible to the corridor? (total jobs per mile within ½ mile of corridor) jobs/mi

Population Access 2,513 Number of residents accessible to the corridor? (total population per mile within ½ mile of residents/ corridor) mi

Long Work Commutes Does corridor serve workers with long commutes? 19% (% of workers with access to the corridor that have commutes longer than 45 minutes)

Minority Access Percentage of minority population within the corridor? (% of population with access to 23% corridor that is non-white or Hispanic)

Low-Income Access Percentage of low-income population within the corridor? (% of households with access to 17% the corridor with incomes less than twice the Federal poverty line)

Zero Car Access Percentage of zero car ownership within the corridor? (% of households with access to 8% corridor that have no cars)

Senior Access Percentage of seniors within the corridor? (% of population with access to corridor that are 14% Length: 17 miles seniors) Jurisdictions served: Anne Arundel County Disabled Access Percentage of people with disabilities within the corridor? (% of population with access to 10% corridor that has a disability)

Future Jobs 2,585 How many future jobs are accessible to the corridor? (total projected jobs (2045) per mile within ½ mile of corridor) jobs/mi

Supportive Zoning Is zoning transit supportive? (% of corridor with transit supportive zoning) 46%

Growth Area Is the corridor within a growth area? (% of corridor in State Incentive Program Area) 23%

1-5 Glen Burnie to Bowie CORRIDOR 4 Subject to future feasibility analysis and local jurisdiction support

EVALUATION MEASURE RESULT

Gap Does this corridor address a current or future transit gap? (yes/no) YES

Existing Plans Is the corridor in existing plans? (yes/no) YES

Improve Service Does the corridor improve existing service? (count of routes which could be improved) 2

Transfer Potential How many transit routes can you transfer to? (count of intersecting transit routes) 5

Supportive Land Use Is land use transit supportive? (% of corridor with transit supportive land use) 12%

Existing Jobs 1,114 How many existing jobs are accessible to the corridor? (total jobs per mile within ½ mile of corridor) jobs/mi

Population Access 3,038 Number of residents accessible to the corridor? (total population per mile within ½ mile of residents/ corridor) mi

Long Work Commutes Does corridor serve workers with long commutes? 22% (% of workers with access to the corridor that have commutes longer than 45 minutes)

Minority Access Percentage of minority population within the corridor? (% of population with access to 42% corridor that is non-white or Hispanic)

Low-Income Access Percentage of low-income population within the corridor? (% of households with access to 19% the corridor with incomes less than twice the Federal poverty line)

Zero Car Access Percentage of zero car ownership within the corridor? (% of households with access to 5% corridor that have no cars)

Senior Access Percentage of seniors within the corridor? (% of population with access to corridor that are 10% Length: 15 miles seniors) Jurisdictions served: Anne Arundel County Disabled Access Percentage of people with disabilities within the corridor? (% of population with access to 8% corridor that has a disability)

Future Jobs 1,838 How many future jobs are accessible to the corridor? (total projected jobs (2045) per mile within ½ mile of corridor) jobs/mi

Supportive Zoning Is zoning transit supportive? (% of corridor with transit supportive zoning) 55%

Growth Area Is the corridor within a growth area? (% of corridor in State Incentive Program Area) 24%

1-6 Convention Center to Middle River CORRIDOR 5 Subject to future feasibility analysis and local jurisdiction support

EVALUATION MEASURE RESULT

Gap Does this corridor address a current or future transit gap? (yes/no) YES

Existing Plans Is the corridor in existing plans? (yes/no) YES

Improve Service Does the corridor improve existing service? (count of routes which could be improved) 5

Transfer Potential How many transit routes can you transfer to? (count of intersecting transit routes) 39

Supportive Land Use Is land use transit supportive? (% of corridor with transit supportive land use) 34%

Existing Jobs 10,407 How many existing jobs are accessible to the corridor? (total jobs per mile within ½ mile of corridor) jobs/mi

Population Access 7,663 Number of residents accessible to the corridor? (total population per mile within ½ mile of residents/ corridor) mi

Long Work Commutes Does corridor serve workers with long commutes? 18% (% of workers with access to the corridor that have commutes longer than 45 minutes)

Minority Access Percentage of minority population within the corridor? (% of population with access to 37% corridor that is non-white or Hispanic)

Low-Income Access Percentage of low-income population within the corridor? (% of households with access to 32% the corridor with incomes less than twice the Federal poverty line)

Zero Car Access Percentage of zero car ownership within the corridor? (% of households with access to 20% corridor that have no cars)

Senior Access Percentage of seniors within the corridor? (% of population with access to corridor that are 11% Length: 11 miles seniors) Jurisdictions served: Baltimore City, Baltimore County Disabled Access Percentage of people with disabilities within the corridor? (% of population with access to 12% corridor that has a disability)

Future Jobs 18,069 How many future jobs are accessible to the corridor? (total projected jobs (2045) per mile within ½ mile of corridor) jobs/mi

Supportive Zoning Is zoning transit supportive? (% of corridor with transit supportive zoning) 76%

Growth Area Is the corridor within a growth area? (% of corridor in State Incentive Program Area) 81%

1-7 Towson to UM Transit Center CORRIDOR 6 Subject to future feasibility analysis and local jurisdiction support

EVALUATION MEASURE RESULT

Gap Does this corridor address a current or future transit gap? (yes/no) YES

Existing Plans Is the corridor in existing plans? (yes/no) YES

Improve Service Does the corridor improve existing service? (count of routes which could be improved) 2

Transfer Potential How many transit routes can you transfer to? (count of intersecting transit routes) 55

Supportive Land Use Is land use transit supportive? (% of corridor with transit supportive land use) 63%

Existing Jobs 14,803 How many existing jobs are accessible to the corridor? (total jobs per mile within ½ mile of corridor) jobs/mi

Population Access 11,921 Number of residents accessible to the corridor? (total population per mile within ½ mile of residents/ corridor) mi

Long Work Commutes Does corridor serve workers with long commutes? 20% (% of workers with access to the corridor that have commutes longer than 45 minutes)

Minority Access Percentage of minority population within the corridor? (% of population with access to 61% corridor that is non-white or Hispanic)

Low-Income Access Percentage of low-income population within the corridor? (% of households with access to 39% the corridor with incomes less than twice the Federal poverty line)

Zero Car Access Percentage of zero car ownership within the corridor? (% of households with access to 34% corridor that have no cars)

Senior Access Percentage of seniors within the corridor? (% of population with access to corridor that are 10% Length: 9 miles seniors) Jurisdictions served: Baltimore City, Baltimore County Disabled Access Percentage of people with disabilities within the corridor? (% of population with access to 12% corridor that has a disability)

Future Jobs 25,852 How many future jobs are accessible to the corridor? (total projected jobs (2045) per mile within ½ mile of corridor) jobs/mi

Supportive Zoning Is zoning transit supportive? (% of corridor with transit supportive zoning) 84%

Growth Area Is the corridor within a growth area? (% of corridor in State Incentive Program Area) 66%

1-8 Towson to Hunt Valley CORRIDOR 7 Subject to future feasibility analysis and local jurisdiction support

EVALUATION MEASURE RESULT

Gap Does this corridor address a current or future transit gap? (yes/no) YES

Existing Plans Is the corridor in existing plans? (yes/no) YES

Improve Service Does the corridor improve existing service? (count of routes which could be improved) 2

Transfer Potential How many transit routes can you transfer to? (count of intersecting transit routes) 6

Supportive Land Use Is land use transit supportive? (% of corridor with transit supportive land use) 21%

Existing Jobs 7,102 How many existing jobs are accessible to the corridor? (total jobs per mile within ½ mile of corridor) jobs/mi

Population Access 3,426 Number of residents accessible to the corridor? (total population per mile within ½ mile of residents/ corridor) mi

Long Work Commutes Does corridor serve workers with long commutes? 17% (% of workers with access to the corridor that have commutes longer than 45 minutes)

Minority Access Percentage of minority population within the corridor? (% of population with access to 30% corridor that is non-white or Hispanic)

Low-Income Access Percentage of low-income population within the corridor? (% of households with access to 19% the corridor with incomes less than twice the Federal poverty line)

Zero Car Access Percentage of zero car ownership within the corridor? (% of households with access to 10% corridor that have no cars)

Senior Access Percentage of seniors within the corridor? (% of population with access to corridor that are 16% Length: 7 miles seniors) Jurisdictions served: Baltimore County Disabled Access Percentage of people with disabilities within the corridor? (% of population with access to 9% corridor that has a disability)

Future Jobs 9,827 How many future jobs are accessible to the corridor? (total projected jobs (2045) per mile within ½ mile of corridor) jobs/mi

Supportive Zoning Is zoning transit supportive? (% of corridor with transit supportive zoning) 50%

Growth Area Is the corridor within a growth area? (% of corridor in State Incentive Program Area) 9%

1-9 Towson to South Baltimore CORRIDOR 8 Subject to future feasibility analysis and local jurisdiction support

EVALUATION MEASURE RESULT

Gap Does this corridor address a current or future transit gap? (yes/no) YES

Existing Plans Is the corridor in existing plans? (yes/no) YES

Improve Service Does the corridor improve existing service? (count of routes which could be improved) 3

Transfer Potential How many transit routes can you transfer to? (count of intersecting transit routes) 51

Supportive Land Use Is land use transit supportive? (% of corridor with transit supportive land use) 51%

Existing Jobs 10,177 How many existing jobs are accessible to the corridor? (total jobs per mile within ½ mile of corridor) jobs/mi

Population Access 9,332 Number of residents accessible to the corridor? (total population per mile within ½ mile of residents/ corridor) mi

Long Work Commutes Does corridor serve workers with long commutes? 19% (% of workers with access to the corridor that have commutes longer than 45 minutes)

Minority Access Percentage of minority population within the corridor? (% of population with access to 67% corridor that is non-white or Hispanic)

Low-Income Access Percentage of low-income population within the corridor? (% of households with access to 34% the corridor with incomes less than twice the Federal poverty line)

Zero Car Access Percentage of zero car ownership within the corridor? (% of households with access to 27% corridor that have no cars)

Senior Access Percentage of seniors within the corridor? (% of population with access to corridor that are 12% Length: 13 miles seniors) Jurisdictions served: Baltimore City, Baltimore County Disabled Access Percentage of people with disabilities within the corridor? (% of population with access to 12% corridor that has a disability)

Future Jobs 17,977 How many future jobs are accessible to the corridor? (total projected jobs (2045) per mile within ½ mile of corridor) jobs/mi

Supportive Zoning Is zoning transit supportive? (% of corridor with transit supportive zoning) 81%

Growth Area Is the corridor within a growth area? (% of corridor in State Incentive Program Area) 73%

1-10 North Plaza to UM Transit Center CORRIDOR 9 Subject to future feasibility analysis and local jurisdiction support

EVALUATION MEASURE RESULT

Gap Does this corridor address a current or future transit gap? (yes/no) YES

Existing Plans Is the corridor in existing plans? (yes/no) YES

Improve Service Does the corridor improve existing service? (count of routes which could be improved) 2

Transfer Potential How many transit routes can you transfer to? (count of intersecting transit routes) 52

Supportive Land Use Is land use transit supportive? (% of corridor with transit supportive land use) 35%

Existing Jobs 9,640 How many existing jobs are accessible to the corridor? (total jobs per mile within ½ mile of corridor) jobs/mi

Population Access 8,421 Number of residents accessible to the corridor? (total population per mile within ½ mile of residents/ corridor) mi

Long Work Commutes Does corridor serve workers with long commutes? 19% (% of workers with access to the corridor that have commutes longer than 45 minutes)

Minority Access Percentage of minority population within the corridor? (% of population with access to 64% corridor that is non-white or Hispanic)

Low-Income Access Percentage of low-income population within the corridor? (% of households with access to 38% the corridor with incomes less than twice the Federal poverty line)

Zero Car Access Percentage of zero car ownership within the corridor? (% of households with access to 29% corridor that have no cars)

Senior Access Percentage of seniors within the corridor? (% of population with access to corridor that are 12% Length: 11 miles seniors) Jurisdictions served: Baltimore City, Baltimore County Disabled Access Percentage of people with disabilities within the corridor? (% of population with access to 13% corridor that has a disability)

Future Jobs 17,136 How many future jobs are accessible to the corridor? (total projected jobs (2045) per mile within ½ mile of corridor) jobs/mi

Supportive Zoning Is zoning transit supportive? (% of corridor with transit supportive zoning) 85%

Growth Area Is the corridor within a growth area? (% of corridor in State Incentive Program Area) 78%

1-11 White Marsh to Johns Hopkins Hospital CORRIDOR 10 Subject to future feasibility analysis and local jurisdiction support

EVALUATION MEASURE RESULT

Gap Does this corridor address a current or future transit gap? (yes/no) YES

Existing Plans Is the corridor in existing plans? (yes/no) YES

Improve Service Does the corridor improve existing service? (count of routes which could be improved) 2

Transfer Potential How many transit routes can you transfer to? (count of intersecting transit routes) 22

Supportive Land Use Is land use transit supportive? (% of corridor with transit supportive land use) 25%

Existing Jobs 3,788 How many existing jobs are accessible to the corridor? (total jobs per mile within ½ mile of corridor) jobs/mi

Population Access 7,259 Number of residents accessible to the corridor? (total population per mile within ½ mile of residents/ corridor) mi

Long Work Commutes Does corridor serve workers with long commutes? 23% (% of workers with access to the corridor that have commutes longer than 45 minutes)

Minority Access Percentage of minority population within the corridor? (% of population with access to 71% corridor that is non-white or Hispanic)

Low-Income Access Percentage of low-income population within the corridor? (% of households with access to 39% the corridor with incomes less than twice the Federal poverty line)

Zero Car Access Percentage of zero car ownership within the corridor? (% of households with access to 26% corridor that have no cars)

Senior Access Percentage of seniors within the corridor? (% of population with access to corridor that are 11% Length: 10 miles seniors) Jurisdictions served: Baltimore City, Baltimore County Disabled Access Percentage of people with disabilities within the corridor? (% of population with access to 12% corridor that has a disability)

Future Jobs 5,171 How many future jobs are accessible to the corridor? (total projected jobs (2045) per mile within ½ mile of corridor) jobs/mi

Supportive Zoning Is zoning transit supportive? (% of corridor with transit supportive zoning) 80%

Growth Area Is the corridor within a growth area? (% of corridor in State Incentive Program Area) 58%

1-12 Fallston to Aberdeen Proving Ground CORRIDOR 11 Subject to future feasibility analysis and local jurisdiction support

EVALUATION MEASURE RESULT

Gap Does this corridor address a current or future transit gap? (yes/no) YES

Existing Plans Is the corridor in existing plans? (yes/no) YES

Improve Service Does the corridor improve existing service? (count of routes which could be improved) 2

Transfer Potential How many transit routes can you transfer to? (count of intersecting transit routes) 7

Supportive Land Use Is land use transit supportive? (% of corridor with transit supportive land use) 2%

Existing Jobs 1,210 How many existing jobs are accessible to the corridor? (total jobs per mile within ½ mile of corridor) jobs/mi

Population Access 1,397 Number of residents accessible to the corridor? (total population per mile within ½ mile of residents/ corridor) mi

Long Work Commutes Does corridor serve workers with long commutes? 25% (% of workers with access to the corridor that have commutes longer than 45 minutes)

Minority Access Percentage of minority population within the corridor? (% of population with access to 23% corridor that is non-white or Hispanic)

Low-Income Access Percentage of low-income population within the corridor? (% of households with access to 20% the corridor with incomes less than twice the Federal poverty line)

Zero Car Access Percentage of zero car ownership within the corridor? (% of households with access to 7% corridor that have no cars)

Senior Access Percentage of seniors within the corridor? (% of population with access to corridor that are 15% Length: 16 miles seniors) Jurisdictions served: Harford County Disabled Access Percentage of people with disabilities within the corridor? (% of population with access to 10% corridor that has a disability)

Future Jobs 1,553 How many future jobs are accessible to the corridor? (total projected jobs (2045) per mile within ½ mile of corridor) jobs/mi

Supportive Zoning Is zoning transit supportive? (% of corridor with transit supportive zoning) 46%

Growth Area Is the corridor within a growth area? (% of corridor in State Incentive Program Area) 21%

1-13 Mondawmin to South Baltimore CORRIDOR 12 Subject to future feasibility analysis and local jurisdiction support

EVALUATION MEASURE RESULT

Gap Does this corridor address a current or future transit gap? (yes/no) YES

Existing Plans Is the corridor in existing plans? (yes/no) YES

Improve Service Does the corridor improve existing service? (count of routes which could be improved) 1

Transfer Potential How many transit routes can you transfer to? (count of intersecting transit routes) 35

Supportive Land Use Is land use transit supportive? (% of corridor with transit supportive land use) 35%

Existing Jobs 2,303 How many existing jobs are accessible to the corridor? (total jobs per mile within ½ mile of corridor) jobs/mi

Population Access 7,299 Number of residents accessible to the corridor? (total population per mile within ½ mile of residents/ corridor) mi

Long Work Commutes Does corridor serve workers with long commutes? 23% (% of workers with access to the corridor that have commutes longer than 45 minutes)

Minority Access Percentage of minority population within the corridor? (% of population with access to 91% corridor that is non-white or Hispanic)

Low-Income Access Percentage of low-income population within the corridor? (% of households with access to 60% the corridor with incomes less than twice the Federal poverty line)

Zero Car Access Percentage of zero car ownership within the corridor? (% of households with access to 45% corridor that have no cars)

Senior Access Percentage of seniors within the corridor? (% of population with access to corridor that are 11% Length: 7 miles seniors) Jurisdictions served: Baltimore City Disabled Access Percentage of people with disabilities within the corridor? (% of population with access to 17% corridor that has a disability)

Future Jobs 4,485 How many future jobs are accessible to the corridor? (total projected jobs (2045) per mile within ½ mile of corridor) jobs/mi

Supportive Zoning Is zoning transit supportive? (% of corridor with transit supportive zoning) 82%

Growth Area Is the corridor within a growth area? (% of corridor in State Incentive Program Area) 100%

1-14 Rogers Avenue to City Hall CORRIDOR 13 Subject to future feasibility analysis and local jurisdiction support

EVALUATION MEASURE RESULT

Gap Does this corridor address a current or future transit gap? (yes/no) YES

Existing Plans Is the corridor in existing plans? (yes/no) YES

Improve Service Does the corridor improve existing service? (count of routes which could be improved) 4

Transfer Potential How many transit routes can you transfer to? (count of intersecting transit routes) 56

Supportive Land Use Is land use transit supportive? (% of corridor with transit supportive land use) 55%

Existing Jobs 12,791 How many existing jobs are accessible to the corridor? (total jobs per mile within ½ mile of corridor) jobs/mi

Population Access 10,433 Number of residents accessible to the corridor? (total population per mile within ½ mile of residents/ corridor) mi

Long Work Commutes Does corridor serve workers with long commutes? 22% (% of workers with access to the corridor that have commutes longer than 45 minutes)

Minority Access Percentage of minority population within the corridor? (% of population with access to 89% corridor that is non-white or Hispanic)

Low-Income Access Percentage of low-income population within the corridor? (% of households with access to 54% the corridor with incomes less than twice the Federal poverty line)

Zero Car Access Percentage of zero car ownership within the corridor? (% of households with access to 40% corridor that have no cars)

Senior Access Percentage of seniors within the corridor? (% of population with access to corridor that are 14% Length: 8 miles seniors) Jurisdictions served: Baltimore City Disabled Access Percentage of people with disabilities within the corridor? (% of population with access to 17% corridor that has a disability)

Future Jobs 21,832 How many future jobs are accessible to the corridor? (total projected jobs (2045) per mile within ½ mile of corridor) jobs/mi

Supportive Zoning Is zoning transit supportive? (% of corridor with transit supportive zoning) 88%

Growth Area Is the corridor within a growth area? (% of corridor in State Incentive Program Area) 95%

1-15 Mondawmin to Reisterstown CORRIDOR 14 Subject to future feasibility analysis and local jurisdiction support

EVALUATION MEASURE RESULT

Gap Does this corridor address a current or future transit gap? (yes/no) YES

Existing Plans Is the corridor in existing plans? (yes/no) YES

Improve Service Does the corridor improve existing service? (count of routes which could be improved) 1

Transfer Potential How many transit routes can you transfer to? (count of intersecting transit routes) 22

Supportive Land Use Is land use transit supportive? (% of corridor with transit supportive land use) 35%

Existing Jobs 3,346 How many existing jobs are accessible to the corridor? (total jobs per mile within ½ mile of corridor) jobs/mi

Population Access 6,980 Number of residents accessible to the corridor? (total population per mile within ½ mile of residents/ corridor) mi

Long Work Commutes Does corridor serve workers with long commutes? 24% (% of workers with access to the corridor that have commutes longer than 45 minutes)

Minority Access Percentage of minority population within the corridor? (% of population with access to 79% corridor that is non-white or Hispanic)

Low-Income Access Percentage of low-income population within the corridor? (% of households with access to 46% the corridor with incomes less than twice the Federal poverty line)

Zero Car Access Percentage of zero car ownership within the corridor? (% of households with access to 29% corridor that have no cars)

Senior Access Percentage of seniors within the corridor? (% of population with access to corridor that are 16% Length: 10 miles seniors) Jurisdictions served: Baltimore City, Baltimore County Disabled Access Percentage of people with disabilities within the corridor? (% of population with access to 15% corridor that has a disability)

Future Jobs 4,107 How many future jobs are accessible to the corridor? (total projected jobs (2045) per mile within ½ mile of corridor) jobs/mi

Supportive Zoning Is zoning transit supportive? (% of corridor with transit supportive zoning) 61%

Growth Area Is the corridor within a growth area? (% of corridor in State Incentive Program Area) 68%

1-16 Mondawmin to Northwest Hospital CORRIDOR 15 Subject to future feasibility analysis and local jurisdiction support

EVALUATION MEASURE RESULT

Gap Does this corridor address a current or future transit gap? (yes/no) YES

Existing Plans Is the corridor in existing plans? (yes/no) YES

Improve Service Does the corridor improve existing service? (count of routes which could be improved) 1

Transfer Potential How many transit routes can you transfer to? (count of intersecting transit routes) 18

Supportive Land Use Is land use transit supportive? (% of corridor with transit supportive land use) 19%

Existing Jobs 1,476 How many existing jobs are accessible to the corridor? (total jobs per mile within ½ mile of corridor) jobs/mi

Population Access 6,543 Number of residents accessible to the corridor? (total population per mile within ½ mile of residents/ corridor) mi

Long Work Commutes Does corridor serve workers with long commutes? 22% (% of workers with access to the corridor that have commutes longer than 45 minutes)

Minority Access Percentage of minority population within the corridor? (% of population with access to 95% corridor that is non-white or Hispanic)

Low-Income Access Percentage of low-income population within the corridor? (% of households with access to 34% the corridor with incomes less than twice the Federal poverty line)

Zero Car Access Percentage of zero car ownership within the corridor? (% of households with access to 19% corridor that have no cars)

Senior Access Percentage of seniors within the corridor? (% of population with access to corridor that are 17% Length: 8 miles seniors) Jurisdictions served: Baltimore City, Baltimore County Disabled Access Percentage of people with disabilities within the corridor? (% of population with access to 15% corridor that has a disability)

Future Jobs 1,935 How many future jobs are accessible to the corridor? (total projected jobs (2045) per mile within ½ mile of corridor) jobs/mi

Supportive Zoning Is zoning transit supportive? (% of corridor with transit supportive zoning) 81%

Growth Area Is the corridor within a growth area? (% of corridor in State Incentive Program Area) 81%

1-17 Ellicott City to Convention Center CORRIDOR 16 Subject to future feasibility analysis and local jurisdiction support

EVALUATION MEASURE RESULT

Gap Does this corridor address a current or future transit gap? (yes/no) YES

Existing Plans Is the corridor in existing plans? (yes/no) YES

Improve Service Does the corridor improve existing service? (count of routes which could be improved) 6

Transfer Potential How many transit routes can you transfer to? (count of intersecting transit routes) 36

Supportive Land Use Is land use transit supportive? (% of corridor with transit supportive land use) 32%

Existing Jobs 6,060 How many existing jobs are accessible to the corridor? (total jobs per mile within ½ mile of corridor) jobs/mi

Population Access 7,468 Number of residents accessible to the corridor? (total population per mile within ½ mile of residents/ corridor) mi

Long Work Commutes Does corridor serve workers with long commutes? 20% (% of workers with access to the corridor that have commutes longer than 45 minutes)

Minority Access Percentage of minority population within the corridor? (% of population with access to 77% corridor that is non-white or Hispanic)

Low-Income Access Percentage of low-income population within the corridor? (% of households with access to 43% the corridor with incomes less than twice the Federal poverty line)

Zero Car Access Percentage of zero car ownership within the corridor? (% of households with access to 31% corridor that have no cars)

Senior Access Percentage of seniors within the corridor? (% of population with access to corridor that are 13% Length: 12 miles seniors) Jurisdictions served: Baltimore City, Baltimore County, Disabled Access Percentage of people with disabilities within the corridor? (% of population with access to 15% Howard County corridor that has a disability)

Future Jobs 10,436 How many future jobs are accessible to the corridor? (total projected jobs (2045) per mile within ½ mile of corridor) jobs/mi

Supportive Zoning Is zoning transit supportive? (% of corridor with transit supportive zoning) 77%

Growth Area Is the corridor within a growth area? (% of corridor in State Incentive Program Area) 48%

1-18 West Baltimore to Hopkins Bayview CORRIDOR 17 Subject to future feasibility analysis and local jurisdiction support

EVALUATION MEASURE RESULT

Gap Does this corridor address a current or future transit gap? (yes/no) YES

Existing Plans Is the corridor in existing plans? (yes/no) YES

Improve Service Does the corridor improve existing service? (count of routes which could be improved) 4

Transfer Potential How many transit routes can you transfer to? (count of intersecting transit routes) 51

Supportive Land Use Is land use transit supportive? (% of corridor with transit supportive land use) 67%

Existing Jobs 20,123 How many existing jobs are accessible to the corridor? (total jobs per mile within ½ mile of corridor) jobs/mi

Population Access 13,366 Number of residents accessible to the corridor? (total population per mile within ½ mile of residents/ corridor) mi

Long Work Commutes Does corridor serve workers with long commutes? 21% (% of workers with access to the corridor that have commutes longer than 45 minutes)

Minority Access Percentage of minority population within the corridor? (% of population with access to 72% corridor that is non-white or Hispanic)

Low-Income Access Percentage of low-income population within the corridor? (% of households with access to 51% the corridor with incomes less than twice the Federal poverty line)

Zero Car Access Percentage of zero car ownership within the corridor? (% of households with access to 42% corridor that have no cars)

Senior Access Percentage of seniors within the corridor? (% of population with access to corridor that are 10% Length: 6 miles seniors) Jurisdictions served: Baltimore City Disabled Access Percentage of people with disabilities within the corridor? (% of population with access to 15% corridor that has a disability)

Future Jobs 33,511 How many future jobs are accessible to the corridor? (total projected jobs (2045) per mile within ½ mile of corridor) jobs/mi

Supportive Zoning Is zoning transit supportive? (% of corridor with transit supportive zoning) 93%

Growth Area Is the corridor within a growth area? (% of corridor in State Incentive Program Area) 98%

1-19 Sparrows Point to Hopkins Bayview CORRIDOR 18 Subject to future feasibility analysis and local jurisdiction support

EVALUATION MEASURE RESULT

Gap Does this corridor address a current or future transit gap? (yes/no) YES

Existing Plans Is the corridor in existing plans? (yes/no) YES

Improve Service Does the corridor improve existing service? (count of routes which could be improved) 2

Transfer Potential How many transit routes can you transfer to? (count of intersecting transit routes) 11

Supportive Land Use Is land use transit supportive? (% of corridor with transit supportive land use) 21%

Existing Jobs 1,719 How many existing jobs are accessible to the corridor? (total jobs per mile within ½ mile of corridor) jobs/mi

Population Access 4,424 Number of residents accessible to the corridor? (total population per mile within ½ mile of residents/ corridor) mi

Long Work Commutes Does corridor serve workers with long commutes? 18% (% of workers with access to the corridor that have commutes longer than 45 minutes)

Minority Access Percentage of minority population within the corridor? (% of population with access to 31% corridor that is non-white or Hispanic)

Low-Income Access Percentage of low-income population within the corridor? (% of households with access to 43% the corridor with incomes less than twice the Federal poverty line)

Zero Car Access Percentage of zero car ownership within the corridor? (% of households with access to 20% corridor that have no cars)

Senior Access Percentage of seniors within the corridor? (% of population with access to corridor that are 16% Length: 6 miles seniors) Jurisdictions served: Baltimore City, Baltimore County Disabled Access Percentage of people with disabilities within the corridor? (% of population with access to 18% corridor that has a disability)

Future Jobs 3,450 How many future jobs are accessible to the corridor? (total projected jobs (2045) per mile within ½ mile of corridor) jobs/mi

Supportive Zoning Is zoning transit supportive? (% of corridor with transit supportive zoning) 73%

Growth Area Is the corridor within a growth area? (% of corridor in State Incentive Program Area) 91%

1-20 State Center to Hopkins Bayview CORRIDOR 19 Subject to future feasibility analysis and local jurisdiction support

EVALUATION MEASURE RESULT

Gap Does this corridor address a current or future transit gap? (yes/no) YES

Existing Plans Is the corridor in existing plans? (yes/no) YES

Improve Service Does the corridor improve existing service? (count of routes which could be improved) 3

Transfer Potential How many transit routes can you transfer to? (count of intersecting transit routes) 37

Supportive Land Use Is land use transit supportive? (% of corridor with transit supportive land use) 67%

Existing Jobs 17,373 How many existing jobs are accessible to the corridor? (total jobs per mile within ½ mile of corridor) jobs/mi

Population Access 15,753 Number of residents accessible to the corridor? (total population per mile within ½ mile of residents/ corridor) mi

Long Work Commutes Does corridor serve workers with long commutes? 21% (% of workers with access to the corridor that have commutes longer than 45 minutes)

Minority Access Percentage of minority population within the corridor? (% of population with access to 67% corridor that is non-white or Hispanic)

Low-Income Access Percentage of low-income population within the corridor? (% of households with access to 45% the corridor with incomes less than twice the Federal poverty line)

Zero Car Access Percentage of zero car ownership within the corridor? (% of households with access to 41% corridor that have no cars)

Senior Access Percentage of seniors within the corridor? (% of population with access to corridor that are 10% Length: 5 miles seniors) Jurisdictions served: Baltimore City Disabled Access Percentage of people with disabilities within the corridor? (% of population with access to 14% corridor that has a disability)

Future Jobs 26,015 How many future jobs are accessible to the corridor? (total projected jobs (2045) per mile within ½ mile of corridor) jobs/mi

Supportive Zoning Is zoning transit supportive? (% of corridor with transit supportive zoning) 95%

Growth Area Is the corridor within a growth area? (% of corridor in State Incentive Program Area) 99%

1-21 Walbrook Junction to Berea CORRIDOR 20 Subject to future feasibility analysis and local jurisdiction support

EVALUATION MEASURE RESULT

Gap Does this corridor address a current or future transit gap? (yes/no) YES

Existing Plans Is the corridor in existing plans? (yes/no) YES

Improve Service Does the corridor improve existing service? (count of routes which could be improved) 1

Transfer Potential How many transit routes can you transfer to? (count of intersecting transit routes) 29

Supportive Land Use Is land use transit supportive? (% of corridor with transit supportive land use) 58%

Existing Jobs 3,262 How many existing jobs are accessible to the corridor? (total jobs per mile within ½ mile of corridor) jobs/mi

Population Access 14,099 Number of residents accessible to the corridor? (total population per mile within ½ mile of residents/ corridor) mi

Long Work Commutes Does corridor serve workers with long commutes? 23% (% of workers with access to the corridor that have commutes longer than 45 minutes)

Minority Access Percentage of minority population within the corridor? (% of population with access to 89% corridor that is non-white or Hispanic)

Low-Income Access Percentage of low-income population within the corridor? (% of households with access to 54% the corridor with incomes less than twice the Federal poverty line)

Zero Car Access Percentage of zero car ownership within the corridor? (% of households with access to 46% corridor that have no cars)

Senior Access Percentage of seniors within the corridor? (% of population with access to corridor that are 12% Length: 5 miles seniors) Jurisdictions served: Baltimore City Disabled Access Percentage of people with disabilities within the corridor? (% of population with access to 17% corridor that has a disability)

Future Jobs 5,130 How many future jobs are accessible to the corridor? (total projected jobs (2045) per mile within ½ mile of corridor) jobs/mi

Supportive Zoning Is zoning transit supportive? (% of corridor with transit supportive zoning) 85%

Growth Area Is the corridor within a growth area? (% of corridor in State Incentive Program Area) 100%

1-22 Laurel to Halethorpe CORRIDOR 21 Subject to future feasibility analysis and local jurisdiction support

EVALUATION MEASURE RESULT

Gap Does this corridor address a current or future transit gap? (yes/no) YES

Existing Plans Is the corridor in existing plans? (yes/no) YES

Improve Service Does the corridor improve existing service? (count of routes which could be improved) 2

Transfer Potential How many transit routes can you transfer to? (count of intersecting transit routes) 9

Supportive Land Use Is land use transit supportive? (% of corridor with transit supportive land use) 1%

Existing Jobs 1,803 How many existing jobs are accessible to the corridor? (total jobs per mile within ½ mile of corridor) jobs/mi

Population Access 2,223 Number of residents accessible to the corridor? (total population per mile within ½ mile of residents/ corridor) mi

Long Work Commutes Does corridor serve workers with long commutes? 20% (% of workers with access to the corridor that have commutes longer than 45 minutes)

Minority Access Percentage of minority population within the corridor? (% of population with access to 50% corridor that is non-white or Hispanic)

Low-Income Access Percentage of low-income population within the corridor? (% of households with access to 20% the corridor with incomes less than twice the Federal poverty line)

Zero Car Access Percentage of zero car ownership within the corridor? (% of households with access to 4% corridor that have no cars)

Senior Access Percentage of seniors within the corridor? (% of population with access to corridor that are 7% Length: 13 miles seniors) Jurisdictions served: Baltimore County, Howard County Disabled Access Percentage of people with disabilities within the corridor? (% of population with access to 6% corridor that has a disability)

Future Jobs 3,174 How many future jobs are accessible to the corridor? (total projected jobs (2045) per mile within ½ mile of corridor) jobs/mi

Supportive Zoning Is zoning transit supportive? (% of corridor with transit supportive zoning) 58%

Growth Area Is the corridor within a growth area? (% of corridor in State Incentive Program Area) 28%

1-23 Mondawmin to Hopkins Bayview CORRIDOR 22 Subject to future feasibility analysis and local jurisdiction support

EVALUATION MEASURE RESULT

Gap Does this corridor address a current or future transit gap? (yes/no) YES

Existing Plans Is the corridor in existing plans? (yes/no) YES

Improve Service Does the corridor improve existing service? (count of routes which could be improved) 1

Transfer Potential How many transit routes can you transfer to? (count of intersecting transit routes) 37

Supportive Land Use Is land use transit supportive? (% of corridor with transit supportive land use) 49%

Existing Jobs 3,630 How many existing jobs are accessible to the corridor? (total jobs per mile within ½ mile of corridor) jobs/mi

Population Access 10,210 Number of residents accessible to the corridor? (total population per mile within ½ mile of residents/ corridor) mi

Long Work Commutes Does corridor serve workers with long commutes? 21% (% of workers with access to the corridor that have commutes longer than 45 minutes)

Minority Access Percentage of minority population within the corridor? (% of population with access to 66% corridor that is non-white or Hispanic)

Low-Income Access Percentage of low-income population within the corridor? (% of households with access to 42% the corridor with incomes less than twice the Federal poverty line)

Zero Car Access Percentage of zero car ownership within the corridor? (% of households with access to 30% corridor that have no cars)

Senior Access Percentage of seniors within the corridor? (% of population with access to corridor that are 12% Length: 11 miles seniors) Jurisdictions served: Baltimore City Disabled Access Percentage of people with disabilities within the corridor? (% of population with access to 12% corridor that has a disability)

Future Jobs 5,269 How many future jobs are accessible to the corridor? (total projected jobs (2045) per mile within ½ mile of corridor) jobs/mi

Supportive Zoning Is zoning transit supportive? (% of corridor with transit supportive zoning) 77%

Growth Area Is the corridor within a growth area? (% of corridor in State Incentive Program Area) 87%

1-24 Halethorpe to UM Transit Center CORRIDOR 23 Subject to future feasibility analysis and local jurisdiction support

EVALUATION MEASURE RESULT

Gap Does this corridor address a current or future transit gap? (yes/no) YES

Existing Plans Is the corridor in existing plans? (yes/no) YES

Improve Service Does the corridor improve existing service? (count of routes which could be improved) 1

Transfer Potential How many transit routes can you transfer to? (count of intersecting transit routes) 21

Supportive Land Use Is land use transit supportive? (% of corridor with transit supportive land use) 20%

Existing Jobs 9,849 How many existing jobs are accessible to the corridor? (total jobs per mile within ½ mile of corridor) jobs/mi

Population Access 5,204 Number of residents accessible to the corridor? (total population per mile within ½ mile of residents/ corridor) mi

Long Work Commutes Does corridor serve workers with long commutes? 16% (% of workers with access to the corridor that have commutes longer than 45 minutes)

Minority Access Percentage of minority population within the corridor? (% of population with access to 52% corridor that is non-white or Hispanic)

Low-Income Access Percentage of low-income population within the corridor? (% of households with access to 46% the corridor with incomes less than twice the Federal poverty line)

Zero Car Access Percentage of zero car ownership within the corridor? (% of households with access to 32% corridor that have no cars)

Senior Access Percentage of seniors within the corridor? (% of population with access to corridor that are 10% Length: 6 miles seniors) Jurisdictions served: Baltimore City Disabled Access Percentage of people with disabilities within the corridor? (% of population with access to 15% corridor that has a disability)

Future Jobs 14,538 How many future jobs are accessible to the corridor? (total projected jobs (2045) per mile within ½ mile of corridor) jobs/mi

Supportive Zoning Is zoning transit supportive? (% of corridor with transit supportive zoning) 73%

Growth Area Is the corridor within a growth area? (% of corridor in State Incentive Program Area) 75%

1-25 BWI Airport to Greenbelt CORRIDOR 24 Subject to future feasibility analysis and local jurisdiction support

EVALUATION MEASURE RESULT

Gap Does this corridor address a current or future transit gap? (yes/no) YES

Existing Plans Is the corridor in existing plans? (yes/no) YES

Improve Service Does the corridor improve existing service? (count of routes which could be improved) 3

Transfer Potential How many transit routes can you transfer to? (count of intersecting transit routes) 7

Supportive Land Use Is land use transit supportive? (% of corridor with transit supportive land use) 4%

Existing Jobs 1,952 How many existing jobs are accessible to the corridor? (total jobs per mile within ½ mile of corridor) jobs/mi

Population Access 1,423 Number of residents accessible to the corridor? (total population per mile within ½ mile of residents/ corridor) mi

Long Work Commutes Does corridor serve workers with long commutes? 26% (% of workers with access to the corridor that have commutes longer than 45 minutes)

Minority Access Percentage of minority population within the corridor? (% of population with access to 60% corridor that is non-white or Hispanic)

Low-Income Access Percentage of low-income population within the corridor? (% of households with access to 13% the corridor with incomes less than twice the Federal poverty line)

Zero Car Access Percentage of zero car ownership within the corridor? (% of households with access to 1% corridor that have no cars)

Senior Access Percentage of seniors within the corridor? (% of population with access to corridor that are 7% Length: 13 miles seniors) Jurisdictions served: Anne Arundel County Disabled Access Percentage of people with disabilities within the corridor? (% of population with access to 6% corridor that has a disability)

Future Jobs 3,795 How many future jobs are accessible to the corridor? (total projected jobs (2045) per mile within ½ mile of corridor) jobs/mi

Supportive Zoning Is zoning transit supportive? (% of corridor with transit supportive zoning) 60%

Growth Area Is the corridor within a growth area? (% of corridor in State Incentive Program Area) 1%

1-26 BWI Airport to Columbia Town Ccenter CORRIDOR 25 Subject to future feasibility analysis and local jurisdiction support

EVALUATION MEASURE RESULT

Gap Does this corridor address a current or future transit gap? (yes/no) YES

Existing Plans Is the corridor in existing plans? (yes/no) YES

Improve Service Does the corridor improve existing service? (count of routes which could be improved) 6

Transfer Potential How many transit routes can you transfer to? (count of intersecting transit routes) 17

Supportive Land Use Is land use transit supportive? (% of corridor with transit supportive land use) 4%

Existing Jobs 2,636 How many existing jobs are accessible to the corridor? (total jobs per mile within ½ mile of corridor) jobs/mi

Population Access 1,944 Number of residents accessible to the corridor? (total population per mile within ½ mile of residents/ corridor) mi

Long Work Commutes Does corridor serve workers with long commutes? 24% (% of workers with access to the corridor that have commutes longer than 45 minutes)

Minority Access Percentage of minority population within the corridor? (% of population with access to 58% corridor that is non-white or Hispanic)

Low-Income Access Percentage of low-income population within the corridor? (% of households with access to 14% the corridor with incomes less than twice the Federal poverty line)

Zero Car Access Percentage of zero car ownership within the corridor? (% of households with access to 5% corridor that have no cars)

Senior Access Percentage of seniors within the corridor? (% of population with access to corridor that are 11% Length: 15 miles seniors) Jurisdictions served: Anne Arundel County, Howard Disabled Access Percentage of people with disabilities within the corridor? (% of population with access to 7% County corridor that has a disability)

Future Jobs 4,710 How many future jobs are accessible to the corridor? (total projected jobs (2045) per mile within ½ mile of corridor) jobs/mi

Supportive Zoning Is zoning transit supportive? (% of corridor with transit supportive zoning) 62%

Growth Area Is the corridor within a growth area? (% of corridor in State Incentive Program Area) 6%

1-27 Odenton to Clarksville CORRIDOR 26 Subject to future feasibility analysis and local jurisdiction support

EVALUATION MEASURE RESULT

Gap Does this corridor address a current or future transit gap? (yes/no) YES

Existing Plans Is the corridor in existing plans? (yes/no) YES

Improve Service Does the corridor improve existing service? (count of routes which could be improved) 2

Transfer Potential How many transit routes can you transfer to? (count of intersecting transit routes) 16

Supportive Land Use Is land use transit supportive? (% of corridor with transit supportive land use) 1%

Existing Jobs 2,851 How many existing jobs are accessible to the corridor? (total jobs per mile within ½ mile of corridor) jobs/mi

Population Access 1,789 Number of residents accessible to the corridor? (total population per mile within ½ mile of residents/ corridor) mi

Long Work Commutes Does corridor serve workers with long commutes? 24% (% of workers with access to the corridor that have commutes longer than 45 minutes)

Minority Access Percentage of minority population within the corridor? (% of population with access to 45% corridor that is non-white or Hispanic)

Low-Income Access Percentage of low-income population within the corridor? (% of households with access to 12% the corridor with incomes less than twice the Federal poverty line)

Zero Car Access Percentage of zero car ownership within the corridor? (% of households with access to 3% corridor that have no cars)

Senior Access Percentage of seniors within the corridor? (% of population with access to corridor that are 8% Length: 17 miles seniors) Jurisdictions served: Anne Arundel County, Howard Disabled Access Percentage of people with disabilities within the corridor? (% of population with access to 6% County corridor that has a disability)

Future Jobs 3,066 How many future jobs are accessible to the corridor? (total projected jobs (2045) per mile within ½ mile of corridor) jobs/mi

Supportive Zoning Is zoning transit supportive? (% of corridor with transit supportive zoning) 48%

Growth Area Is the corridor within a growth area? (% of corridor in State Incentive Program Area) 45%

1-28 Ellicott City to Silver Spring CORRIDOR 27 Subject to future feasibility analysis and local jurisdiction support

EVALUATION MEASURE RESULT

Gap Does this corridor address a current or future transit gap? (yes/no) YES

Existing Plans Is the corridor in existing plans? (yes/no) YES

Improve Service Does the corridor improve existing service? (count of routes which could be improved) 6

Transfer Potential How many transit routes can you transfer to? (count of intersecting transit routes) 12

Supportive Land Use Is land use transit supportive? (% of corridor with transit supportive land use) 7%

Existing Jobs 1,619 How many existing jobs are accessible to the corridor? (total jobs per mile within ½ mile of corridor) jobs/mi

Population Access 2,615 Number of residents accessible to the corridor? (total population per mile within ½ mile of residents/ corridor) mi

Long Work Commutes Does corridor serve workers with long commutes? 25% (% of workers with access to the corridor that have commutes longer than 45 minutes)

Minority Access Percentage of minority population within the corridor? (% of population with access to 47% corridor that is non-white or Hispanic)

Low-Income Access Percentage of low-income population within the corridor? (% of households with access to 16% the corridor with incomes less than twice the Federal poverty line)

Zero Car Access Percentage of zero car ownership within the corridor? (% of households with access to 6% corridor that have no cars)

Senior Access Percentage of seniors within the corridor? (% of population with access to corridor that are 12% Length: 12 miles seniors) Jurisdictions served: Howard County Disabled Access Percentage of people with disabilities within the corridor? (% of population with access to 8% corridor that has a disability)

Future Jobs 3,681 How many future jobs are accessible to the corridor? (total projected jobs (2045) per mile within ½ mile of corridor) jobs/mi

Supportive Zoning Is zoning transit supportive? (% of corridor with transit supportive zoning) 85%

Growth Area Is the corridor within a growth area? (% of corridor in State Incentive Program Area) 0%

1-29 Annapolis to Union Station CORRIDOR 28 Subject to future feasibility analysis and local jurisdiction support

EVALUATION MEASURE RESULT

Gap Does this corridor address a current or future transit gap? (yes/no) YES

Existing Plans Is the corridor in existing plans? (yes/no) YES

Improve Service Does the corridor improve existing service? (count of routes which could be improved) 5

Transfer Potential How many transit routes can you transfer to? (count of intersecting transit routes) 14

Supportive Land Use Is land use transit supportive? (% of corridor with transit supportive land use) 12%

Existing Jobs 2,575 How many existing jobs are accessible to the corridor? (total jobs per mile within ½ mile of corridor) jobs/mi

Population Access 1,719 Number of residents accessible to the corridor? (total population per mile within ½ mile of residents/ corridor) mi

Long Work Commutes Does corridor serve workers with long commutes? 19% (% of workers with access to the corridor that have commutes longer than 45 minutes)

Minority Access Percentage of minority population within the corridor? (% of population with access to 27% corridor that is non-white or Hispanic)

Low-Income Access Percentage of low-income population within the corridor? (% of households with access to 19% the corridor with incomes less than twice the Federal poverty line)

Zero Car Access Percentage of zero car ownership within the corridor? (% of households with access to 8% corridor that have no cars)

Senior Access Percentage of seniors within the corridor? (% of population with access to corridor that are 16% Length: 12 miles seniors) Jurisdictions served: Anne Arundel County Disabled Access Percentage of people with disabilities within the corridor? (% of population with access to 8% corridor that has a disability)

Future Jobs 3,831 How many future jobs are accessible to the corridor? (total projected jobs (2045) per mile within ½ mile of corridor) jobs/mi

Supportive Zoning Is zoning transit supportive? (% of corridor with transit supportive zoning) 34%

Growth Area Is the corridor within a growth area? (% of corridor in State Incentive Program Area) 8%

1-30 Bel Air to Edgewood CORRIDOR 29 Subject to future feasibility analysis and local jurisdiction support

EVALUATION MEASURE RESULT

Gap Does this corridor address a current or future transit gap? (yes/no) YES

Existing Plans Is the corridor in existing plans? (yes/no) YES

Improve Service Does the corridor improve existing service? (count of routes which could be improved) 2

Transfer Potential How many transit routes can you transfer to? (count of intersecting transit routes) 3

Supportive Land Use Is land use transit supportive? (% of corridor with transit supportive land use) 0%

Existing Jobs 1,459 How many existing jobs are accessible to the corridor? (total jobs per mile within ½ mile of corridor) jobs/mi

Population Access 3,129 Number of residents accessible to the corridor? (total population per mile within ½ mile of residents/ corridor) mi

Long Work Commutes Does corridor serve workers with long commutes? 29% (% of workers with access to the corridor that have commutes longer than 45 minutes)

Minority Access Percentage of minority population within the corridor? (% of population with access to 25% corridor that is non-white or Hispanic)

Low-Income Access Percentage of low-income population within the corridor? (% of households with access to 21% the corridor with incomes less than twice the Federal poverty line)

Zero Car Access Percentage of zero car ownership within the corridor? (% of households with access to 6% corridor that have no cars)

Senior Access Percentage of seniors within the corridor? (% of population with access to corridor that are 13% Length: 9 miles seniors) Jurisdictions served: Harford County Disabled Access Percentage of people with disabilities within the corridor? (% of population with access to 10% corridor that has a disability)

Future Jobs 3,181 How many future jobs are accessible to the corridor? (total projected jobs (2045) per mile within ½ mile of corridor) jobs/mi

Supportive Zoning Is zoning transit supportive? (% of corridor with transit supportive zoning) 75%

Growth Area Is the corridor within a growth area? (% of corridor in State Incentive Program Area) 28%

1-31 Ellicott City to BWI Airport CORRIDOR 30 Subject to future feasibility analysis and local jurisdiction support

EVALUATION MEASURE RESULT

Gap Does this corridor address a current or future transit gap? (yes/no) YES

Existing Plans Is the corridor in existing plans? (yes/no) YES

Improve Service Does the corridor improve existing service? (count of routes which could be improved) 1

Transfer Potential How many transit routes can you transfer to? (count of intersecting transit routes) 14

Supportive Land Use Is land use transit supportive? (% of corridor with transit supportive land use) 3%

Existing Jobs 2,163 How many existing jobs are accessible to the corridor? (total jobs per mile within ½ mile of corridor) jobs/mi

Population Access 2,247 Number of residents accessible to the corridor? (total population per mile within ½ mile of residents/ corridor) mi

Long Work Commutes Does corridor serve workers with long commutes? 21% (% of workers with access to the corridor that have commutes longer than 45 minutes)

Minority Access Percentage of minority population within the corridor? (% of population with access to 50% corridor that is non-white or Hispanic)

Low-Income Access Percentage of low-income population within the corridor? (% of households with access to 14% the corridor with incomes less than twice the Federal poverty line)

Zero Car Access Percentage of zero car ownership within the corridor? (% of households with access to 3% corridor that have no cars)

Senior Access Percentage of seniors within the corridor? (% of population with access to corridor that are 9% Length: 14 miles seniors) Jurisdictions served: Anne Arundel County, Howard Disabled Access Percentage of people with disabilities within the corridor? (% of population with access to 6% County corridor that has a disability)

Future Jobs 3,674 How many future jobs are accessible to the corridor? (total projected jobs (2045) per mile within ½ mile of corridor) jobs/mi

Supportive Zoning Is zoning transit supportive? (% of corridor with transit supportive zoning) 80%

Growth Area Is the corridor within a growth area? (% of corridor in State Incentive Program Area) 2%

1-32 Appendix Prioritization 2 Metholodogies Network Improvements and Corridors Technical Report Appendix 2: Prioritization Methodologies Table of Contents Introduction

In order to evaluate the suitability of the corridors, the project team developed measures that reflected the goals below. These measures aim to assess existing transit readiness and quantify the magnitude of a potential corridor’s impact on existing and future conditions.

Introduction...... 2-3 This document lists each measure and explains the methodology and source behind each one. The measures are not weighted—rather, they are meant Goals...... 2-3 to be a guide for decision-makers to understand the potential impacts that improvements to each transit corridor would have on different demographics of people, access to jobs, and access to other existing transit. Prioritization Methodologies...... 2-4 Does this corridor address a current or future transit gap?...... 2-4 The results of these measures will help the RTP project team, the How many existing jobs are accessible to the corridor?...... 2-4 commissioners, the public, and other stakeholders prioritize the corridors and the implementation timeline of improvements. How many future jobs are accessible to the corridor?...... 2-5 Is land use/zoning transit-supportive?...... 2-5 Is the corridor within a growth area?...... 2-7 Is the corridor in existing plans?...... 2-8 Goal 1 Goal 2 How many transit routes can you transfer to?...... 2-8 Does corridor improve on existing service?...... 2-9 Improve Connectivity & Optimize Existing Transit Number of residents accessible to the corridor...... 2-9 Seamlessness of Transit Services Percentage of minority population within the corridor...... 2-10 Services Percentage of low-income population within the corridor...... 2-10 Percentage of zero car ownership within the corridor...... 2-10 Percentage of seniors within the corridor...... 2-11 Percentage of people with disabilities within the corridor...... 2-11 Does corridor serve areas with long commuting times?...... 2-11

2-2 2-3 Network Improvements and Corridors Technical Report Appendix 2: Prioritization Methodologies

Does this corridor address a current How many future jobs are or future transit gap? accessible to the corridor?

Each corridor was evaluated against three criteria, listed below. If the corridor Similar to the existing jobs accessible measure, first, each corridor was buffered met at least one criterion, it was determined to address a transit gap. ½ mile (as the crow flies) to represent the corridor’s walkable service area, and future jobs within a transportation analysis zone (TAZ) that intersected the buffer were summed. If a TAZ intersected only part of the buffer, only a proportion of the jobs assigned to that TAZ (proportional to the percentage of the TAZ’s total area that intersected the buffer) were added to the job sum.

Then, the total number of projected jobs accessible to the corridor was divided by the total length in miles of the corridor to control for length of the The corridor creates a The corridor has existing The corridor justifies corridor. The resulting direct link that doesn’t service but demand for additional infrastructure measure was Number exist but is justified now additional or a higher investment to improve of Future Jobs per Mile. or in the future. quality or level of service travel times or reliability Source: BRTB-CFC is justified. of existing transit Round 9 Cooperative service. Forecasted Jobs Data The market, transit network, and travel flow analyses were evaluated for 2045 together by the RTP Project Team in order to determine which gap(s) a corridor filled. A “yes” was required for the corridor to move forward. Is land use/zoning transit-supportive? How many existing jobs are One important accessible to the corridor? indicator of whether a place is compatible First, each corridor was buffered ½ mile (as the crow flies) to represent with transit service is the corridor’s walkable service area, and jobs within all block groups that the level of intensity intersected the buffer were summed. If a block group intersected only part of the land use within of the buffer, only a proportion of the jobs assigned to that block group an easy walk of the (proportional to the percentage of the block group’s total area that intersected corridor. To identify the buffer) were added to the job sum. where land use was transit-supportive, Then, the total number of jobs accessible to the corridor was divided by the three separate total length in miles of the corridor to control for length of the corridor. The measures answer were resulting measure was Number of Jobs per Mile. recorded. Source: LEHD 2015 Jobs Data continued on next page...

2-4 2-5 Network Improvements and Corridors Technical Report Appendix 2: Prioritization Methodologies

Is land use/zoning Is land use/zoning transit-supportive? transit-supportive? (continued)

continued from previous page... zoning category was a clear “no.” Some designations were less clear, and were sorted into the “maybe” category, such as Baltimore County’s Service First, locations were identified where there are greater than 30 job/residents Employment zone, which was described as “permits and encourages the per acre, according to ACS and LEHD data, on the census block level. These development of offices, related business service uses and small, low impact, locations were designated as High Density. Using the same data, locations light industrial uses; stresses compatibility with residential uses.” were identified where there were 15 to 30 jobs/residents per acre; these Source: Jurisdiction Zoning Ordinances (Anne Arundel County, 2019; locations were labeled Moderate. Baltimore City, 2016; Baltimore County, 2019; Harford County 2019; Howard County, 2018) In the same manner as the other geographic measures, each corridor was first buffered ½ mile (as the crow flies) to represent the corridor’s walkable service area, and the area of each block group that intersected the buffer and which was categorized as either high or moderate density was summed. If a block group intersected only part of the buffer, only a portion of the area that Is the corridor within was assigned to that block group (proportional to the amount of the area that a growth area? intersected the buffer) was added to the transit-supportive area sum. The transit-supportive land use area was then divided by the total area accessible Similar to the land use to the corridor buffer to find the percentage of area that is transit-supportive. and zoning measures, High Density and Moderate Density percentages have been reported the state incentive separately. program (SIP) zones Source: ACS 2015 5-year Estimates and LEHD 2015 Jobs Data were examined for their overlap with the To find zoning that is transit-supportive, each jurisdiction’s local zoning walkable buffers around ordinances were examined, and each zoning category was qualitatively sorted the proposed corridors. into a “Yes/No/Maybe” category in terms of being transit-supportive based on State Incentive Programs examined included: Enterprise zones, BRAC zones, provided densities and descriptions in the zoning ordinances. TOD Areas, Opportunity Zones, and Sustainable Communities. Then each corridor was buffered ½ mile (as the crow flies) to represent the If a SIP zone intersected the corridor’s ½-mile buffer (representing the corridor’s walkable service area, and intersected with the jurisdictional zones corridor’s walkable service area), that SIP zone’s area was summed. If a that were categorized as either yes or maybe transit-supportive, and the areas SIP zone intersected only part of the buffer, only a portion of the area that were summed. If a zone intersected only part of the buffer, only a portion of was assigned to that zone (proportional to the percentage of the area that the area that was assigned to that zone (proportional to the amount of the intersected the buffer) was added to the growth area sum. The growth area area that intersected the buffer) was added to the transit-supportive area was then divided by the total area accessible to the corridor buffer to find the sum. The transit-supportive zoning area was then divided by the total area percentage of area which is within a growth boundary. While there were many accessible to the corridor buffer to find the percentage of area which is transit- ways to define “growth area,” the State Incentive Programs, taken together, supportive. include specific ways in which development is incentivized, and are created with input from the jurisdictions. Many of the zoning categories are purely descriptive and provide no numeric Source: Maryland Departments of Commerce, Housing and Community density limits, but some zoning categories were clear as to whether or not Development, and Transportation they could generate significant transit demand; Howard County’s R-A-15- TNC zoning category, which allows “Residential: Apartments, Traditional Neighborhood Center” was a clear “yes” while Harford County’s Agricultural

2-6 2-7 Network Improvements and Corridors Technical Report Appendix 2: Prioritization Methodologies

Does corridor improve on existing Is the corridor in existing plans? service?

A corridor’s inclusion in officially adopted planning documents indicates that Each corridor was buffered 1/8 mile and intersected with the 1/8 mile buffer it is representative of the vision, strategic decisions, and expectations of the of the alignments for existing transit routes. Those routes were then divided community. Each corridor received one point for each of the types of plan that into routes which would be replaced with the new corridor service, and routes was specific to the corridor or to one which would intersect with the corridor service. If a route that would likely be of the places that the corridor would County replaced by a corridor service was found, then the corridor was determined to serve. The types of plans are: Development Plan be likely to improve on an existing service. • Corridor plans Source: GTFS Feeds from 2019 for MTA and LOTS. A “yes” was required for • TOD plans, or other transit- the corridor to move forward. specific plans RTP Corridor • Place-based plans such as small area plans • The jurisdiction comprehensive plan, bike/ped master plan or priority letter Number of residents accessible to

Source: A survey of publicly available planning documents that the corridor mention the corridors and the places they serve; County/Jurisdiction Comprehensive Plans First, each corridor was buffered ½ mile (as the crow flies) to represent the How many transit routes can you corridor’s walkable service area, and the population transfer to? within a block group that intersected the buffer was summed. If a block group intersected only part Each corridor was buffered of the buffer, only a proportion of the population was assigned to that block 1/8 mile (as the crow flies) and group (proportional to the percentage of the area that intersected the intersected with the 1/8-mile buffer) were added to the population sum. Then, the total number of people buffer of the alignments accessible to the corridor was divided by the total length in miles of the for existing transit routes. corridor. The resulting measure was Number of People per Mile. This was done Corridors were only buffered to control for length of the corridor. 1/8 mile for the transfer analysis (compared to ½ mile for other metrics Source: ACS 2015 5-year Estimates evaluated in this analysis) because passengers are typically unwilling to walk long distances to make a transfer from one transit route to another. Routes identified as intersecting with the proposed corridors were then divided into routes which would be replaced with the new or improved corridor service, and routes which would intersect with the corridor service. The number of routes that intersected with the corridor service were summed to find the total number of potential transit routes that would have a transfer opportunity with the new corridor. Source: GTFS Feeds from 2019 for MTA and LOTS

2-8 2-9 Network Improvements and Corridors Technical Report Appendix 2: Prioritization Methodologies

Percentage of minority population Percentage of seniors within the within the corridor? corridor?

For this equity measure, each corridor was buffered ½ mile (as the crow flies) Same process as minority population, except found for populations over 65 to represent the corridor’s walkable service area, and the population within years old. a block group that intersected the buffer were summed. If a block group Source: ACS 2015 5-year Estimates intersected only part of the buffer, only a proportion of the population was assigned to that block group (proportional to the percentage of the area that intersected the buffer) were added to the population sum. This process was then repeated to find the minority populations. Minority was defined as non- Percentage of people with white only persons. disabilities within the corridor? Then, the percent of minority was found by dividing the minority population accessible to the corridor by the total population accessible to the corridor. Same process as minority population, except found for populations with a Source: ACS 2015 5-year Estimates disability. Source: ACS 2015 5-year Estimates

Percentage of low-income population within the corridor? Does corridor serve areas with long commuting times? Same process as minority population, except found for households with incomes under 200% of the federal poverty line. Households were controlled for size in determining the poverty line limit to use. Travel time for each block group in the Source: ACS 2015 5-year Estimates study area was imputed from ACS data. In the ACS dataset, travel time Percentage of zero car ownership is reported as the number of residents whose typical commute length falls within the corridor? within specified intervals (e.g. five minutes to nine minutes, 10 minutes to 14 minutes). Same process as minority population, except found for households reporting Each corridor was then buffered ½ mile (as the crow flies), and the number of no car available. workers (who do not report working at home) with commutes (on any mode) Source: ACS 2015 5-year Estimates longer than 45 minutes were summed. If a block group intersected only part of the buffer, only a proportion of the workers was assigned to that block group (proportional to the percentage of the area that intersected the buffer) were added to the worker sum. The final measure used was the percent of workers within the corridor with commutes greater than 45 minutes. Source: ACS 2015 5-year Estimates

2-10 2-11 For more information, or to request this document in an alternate format or translated into another language, please contact [email protected]// 443-475-0687 // TTY 410-539-3497 // Maryland Relay users dial 7-1-1