MARYLAND’S CONSOLIDATED TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM The Consolidated Transportation Program (CTP) is Maryland’s six-year capital budget for transportation projects. The Capital Program includes major and minor projects for the Maryland Department of Transportation, its modal agencies – the Maryland Aviation Administration (MAA), Maryland Port Administration (MPA), Motor Vehicle Administration (MVA), State Highway Administration (SHA) and the Maryland Transit Administration (MTA) and related authorities within the Department, including, the Maryland Transportation Authority (MdTA), and Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority (WMATA). In this document, you will find a Project Information Form (PIF) for every major project in the state which includes project details, financial information and construction status as well as a list of minor capital projects. The Maryland Department of Transportation (MDOT) works together with residents, local jurisdictions and local and State elected officials to include projects in the CTP that preserve investments, enhance transportation services and improve accessibility throughout the State. In order to help Maryland’s citizens review this document, the CTP includes a summary of the Department’s financing and budgeting process and instructions for reading Project Information Forms (PIFs). For further information about this document, please contact the Maryland Department of Transportation, Office of Planning and Capital Programming toll free at 1-888-713-1414, or locally at 410-865-1288. This document also is available online at: http://www.mdot.maryland.gov/Planning/Index.html. For the hearing impaired, Maryland Relay 711. For more information on Maryland transportation, please visit us on the web please visit us on the web at www.mdot.maryland.gov

TABLE OF CONTENTS Summary of the Consolidated Transportation Program ............................................. 1 Significant Changes to the FY 2011-2016 CTP ...................................................... A-1 FY 2011 Accomplishments . ................................................................................... A-9 Operating and Capital Program Summary ............................................................ A-17 Federal Aid Obligations ....................................................................................... A-19 System Preservation Minor Projects Program Levels. ......................................... A-22 Major Bridge Projects ........................................................................................... A-25 Bicycle and Pedestrian Related Projects ............................................................. A-28 Regional Aviation Grants ...................................................................................... A-36 Maryland Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) Activities ................................ A-38 American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) Projects ............................... A-49 The Secretary’s Office ...................................................................................... TSO-1 Motor Vehicle Administration ............................................................................. MVA-1 Maryland Aviation Administration…………………………………………………..MAA-1 Maryland Port Administration ............................................................................ MPA-1 Maryland Transit Administration ........................................................................ MTA-1 Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority ............................................ WMAT-1 State Highway Administration ..................................................................... SHA-SW-1 Maryland Transportation Authority ................................................................. MdTA-1 Glossary ............................................................................................................... GL-1

MARTRAN

The Marthe StateFY 201transportinvestmelife. The made byarray of debt, CoeconomiFund, thgrowth a These iinvestmesustainabMDOT cenvironmproviding Each yeaSRT con

RYLAND’S NSPORTAT

ryland Departmene’s six year capit12-2017 Consotation system proent is necessary CTP is the comp

y the State of Mamultifaceted issuongressional inacc downturn, we

he Base Realignand environmentassues require M

ent decisions. By bility agenda of tcan: address safment, enhance acg more effective,

ar, MDOT publisntains three impo

CONSOLITION PRO

nt of Transportattal investment prolidated Transpovides Maryland m

to sustain, enhaprehensive listing aryland. This yearues including: thection on transpoak revenues sunment and Closal issues such as

MDOT to be stratfocusing on our he Governor’s Smfety and system ccessibility and elonger-lasting sol

hes the State Reortant documents

IDATED

OGRAM

tion (MDOT) is program for transpportation Programany great beneance and strengtof transportation

r’s CTP will be ime growing concernortation authorizapporting the Traure (BRAC) prowater quality andtegic in how we investments as pmart, Green and

preservation neencourage healthlutions.

eport on Transpo: the Maryland T

pleased to preseportation, the Finam (CTP). Oufits, and continuethen our quality investments to b

mpacted by a widn over the nationation, the nationansportation Truocess and related climate change.

propose to makpart of the broadeGrowing initiativ

eeds, improve ouhier lifestyles whi

ortation (SRT). Thransportation Pla

nt al ur ed of be de n’s al st

ed

ke er e, ur le

he an

(MTP),AttainmMarylaapproamainte Major improvstudiesessent In 2010transpamajor This yeInformathis leg

KEYPRIO Transpnetwor • Our congesMaryla762,00populatranspoacres oacres iacres. • MaryvehiclerenewaApproxtranspogasolinYork (2

the Consolidatment Report (AR)nd’s transportatio

aches: to planninnance of our tran

capital projects ved facility or sers, design, right-oial equipment rela

0, the Maryland Garency and accoucapital projects fear, like last, youation Forms (PIFgislation.

Y FACTORORITIZATportation prioritiesrk users. Key con

transportation stion and dispernd’s 6.2 million

00 jobs and motion will increaseortation infrastrucof Maryland. Althin our State, it to

yland relies heave purchases to finable resources ximately one-quaortation. Marylanne per capita eac293), but lower th

ted Transportatio) on Transportatioon issues and prng and design, tnsportation netwo

generally includrvice that generaof-way acquisitioated to the facility

General Assembuntability in the efor the Consolidau will see some a) for construction

RS AFFECTTION s are influenced cerns include:

system is incrersed land-use pacres of land wore than 6.6 m

e demands on oucture. Developedhough it took 300ook a mere 30 ye

vily upon fees genance its transpo

will become inrter of Maryland’

nd residents coch year, higher an the U.S. avera

on Program (CTon System Perforiorities, MDOT mto construction, tork.

e a new, expanally involves planon and constructy or service.

ly passed a bill ievaluation and seated Transportatadditional inform

n projects that res

TING

by the everyday

easingly challenpatterns. Over till be home to 5

million people. Mur land, water and land consume0 years to develears to develop

enerated from fuortation system. Tncreasingly sca’s overall energy nsume more ththan both Califoage (464).

TP) and the annrmance. To addrmust undertake nto operation and

nded or significanning, environmetion or purchase

ntended to enhaelection of propoion Program (CTation on the Pro

spond to element

y experience of

ged due to trathe next 20 yea547,000 househoMaryland’s grow

nd air as well as es about 1.3 milop the first 650,0the second 650,0

el consumption The fuel based nrce in the futuusage goes tow

han 448 gallonsrnia (414) and N

1

nual ress new d to

antly ntal

e of

nce sed TP). oject s of

our

affic ars,

olds, wing

our lion 000 000

and non-ure.

ward s of New

• Unsafefinancial people dinjured aAdministfewer thacontinueas safe deaths o • Until 20World WThis figuin both pperiod. transportmoving transporttransit rid • MDOT preservaoperationhighway replacemstructurasystem t • The Enfor the Cof certainPaved urepresensignificanboth newstormwa • Marylanover age • With Mdecreasitransport

e driving and highhardship to Mary

died on Marylandat a cost of moretration (SHA) setan 50,000 by 20d to make progreas possible. In

on all roads.

008, Vehicle MileWar II. Drivers in ure represents a 4population (17%Such a signif

tation system, its people (not justation system thders, freight shipp

places a high pration. The MTP anal improvementand runway res

ments and facility ally deficient bridghat ensures safe

nvironmental ProtChesapeake Bay n pollutants that

urban areas, inclnt a significant nt role in the Bayw infrastructure ter.

nders are growine 65 is expected t

Maryland’s populng, we will neetation infrastructu

hway conditions ryland citizens. Fr roads and highw

e than $4.5 billiont a goal to reduc010. The state reess with its contin

2010 the record

es Traveled (VMTMaryland travele40% increase in ) and new lane ficant increase economy and its

st vehicles) throhat accommodatpers, bicyclists an

riority on allocatinand the CTP botts to the transpurfacing, rail carupkeep. SHA is

ges in the state antravel for all Mary

tection Agency hand its tributary can be dischargeuding highways source of thos

y restoration effortand from facilit

ng older. By 2030o grow to nearly 2

ation increasing ed more homesure and differenc

result in death, inrom 1996 to 2005ways and more tn annually. MDOTce annual motor eached this goalnual daily efforts ded injuries were

T) had increaseded 57 billion vehiVMT from 1990,miles (8%) durin

in driving sts environment. MDughout Marylandtes all users, innd pedestrians.

ng funds toward th reflect significaportation system,r overhauls and rfocused on reducnd on maintainingyland motorists.

as established arivers that will reed to the waters and other trans

se pollutants. Mt by treating stormies built before

0, the percentage20% from just 7.6

and the averags to house us. es in housing co

njury, disability an5, more than 6,00than 600,000 werT’s State Highwavehicle injuries t

l in 2008 and hato make our roade 44,401 and 45

d every year sincicle miles in 200, outpacing growtng the same timtrains MarylandDOT is focused od by providing ncluding: vehicle

safety and systeant investments , bridge programreplacements, bucing the number g a strong highwa

a “pollution budgeegulate the amou

of the Bay stateportation facilitie

MDOT will play mwater runoff fro

the regulation

e of the populatio6% in 1970.

ge household sizImprovements t

osts and consume

nd 00 re ay to as ds 59

ce 6. th

me d’s on a

es,

m in

m, us of ay

et” nt s. s, a m of

on

ze to er

demanincreas • As pgrows, • By 2Marylaexpect

ESTTRA The 20world-cpoliciesof 2010fundingstatewi

nd means that ressingly dispersed.

people become mcongestion is inc

2026, the numbnd by more thaed to increase by

ABLISHINANSPORTA009 Maryland Traclass multimodas and identifies fi0, Maryland Stateg include an expide goals. A desc

sidential developm

more mobile andcreasing.

ber of licensed an 23% and they 40%.

NG ATION PRIansportation Plal system. It ouive long-term goae Law Chapter 7

planation of how cription of each of

ment and employ

d the demand fo

drivers is expece number of reg

IORITIESn establishes a tlines key state

als to guide inves725 requires that

the projects willf the five goals is

yment are becom

or goods movem

cted to increasegistered vehicles

20-year vision foewide transportastment decisions.requests for pro contribute to thincluded below:

2

ming

ment

e in s is

or a tion . As

oject ese

3

• Quality of Service: Enhance users’ access to and positive experience with all MDOT transportation services; • Safety and Security: Provide transportation assets that maximize personal safety and security in all situations; • System Preservation and Performance: Protect Maryland’s investment in its transportation system to preserve existing assets and maximize the efficient use of resources and infrastructure; • Environmental Stewardship: Develop transportation policies and initiatives that protect the natural, community and historic resources of the State and that encourage development in areas best able to support growth; and • Connectivity for Daily Life: Support continued economic growth in the State through strategic investments in a balanced, multimodal transportation system. Alongside each of its goals, the State has established a concrete set of objectives that represent measurable benchmarks for achievement. In order to assess achievement, MDOT collects data, sets targets and measures performance in a number of categories related to the five transportation goals and publishes this information in its annual Attainment Report. While the state’s long-term transportation goals are a fundamental component in establishing priorities for the annual CTP, there are several other influences guiding and directing the state’s transportation system. Transportation planning and programming in Maryland is shaped by an array of Federal laws, regulations and policies, including the Safe, Accountable, Flexible and Efficient Transportation Equity Act: a Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU) of 2005 – commonly known as the federal transportation bill – and the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990. In 2009, Congress acted to prevent a Highway Trust Fund shortfall through temporary legislation. Although Congress has still not passed a new long-term federal surface transportation bill, Maryland remains committed to being part of the national ongoing dialogue to ensure federal surface transportation funding continues uninterrupted. Transportation priorities in Maryland’s major metropolitan areas also are shaped by six federally-established Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs) that coordinate transportation investments and develop regional plans. The State’s six MPOs include the Baltimore Regional Transportation Board (BRTB), Cumberland MPO, Hagerstown-Eastern

Panhandle MPO (HEPMPO), National Capital Region Transportation Planning Board (TPB), Salisbury/Wicomico Area MPO and Wilmington Area Planning Council. MDOT and its modal administrations work closely with Maryland’s local governments on developing the capital program. In addition to reviewing county priority letters, outlining local transportation priorities, the Secretary meets with each of the 24 local jurisdictions individually every fall. This set of meetings, also known as the CTP Tour, allows the Secretary to have a dialogue in person with the local governments and citizens and provides an opportunity to discuss a variety of issues that impact transportation investments. In addition to giving local officials an opportunity to voice their priorities directly with the Secretary, these meetings also allow the public to shape the CTP and express interest, concern or consensus about particular projects. MDOT takes pride in listening to feedback from its customers. We consider all this local input when revising the CTP before it is submitted to the Governor and then the legislature in January.

UNDERSTANDING OUR PRIORITIES This year’s CTP is reflects the priorities of the O’Malley-Brown Administration embodied in the goals of the Maryland Transportation Plan and is influenced by federal and state mandates related to transportation, the interests and concerns of local governments and the public. Guided by these considerations, MDOT has established a clear set of priorities that represent a core focus of the State’s transportation program. While MDOT places a strong emphasis on these priorities, our economic challenges continue to limit resources and to require the Department to make tough decisions about how to invest public dollars in the most efficient and cost-effective way. Given the current issues and constraints, MDOT views the following as our transportation priorities: Priority: System Preservation & Safety MDOT continues to place a high priority on allocating funds toward system preservation and safety. The MTP and the CTP both reflect significant investments in the bridge program, road and runway resurfacing, rail car overhauls and replacements, bus replacements and facility upkeep. A key area of focus is the condition of bridges across Maryland. The State Highway Administration continues to make significant progress in reducing the number

of structutravel for Priority Marylandmeans topublic traby provitransit syfocus fochoose tfewer emO’Malley2020. Thsmall citiMARC TWashing

The O’Mtransit inWashing

urally deficient brr Maryland motor

: Transit Impro

d citizens, busineo get to and fromansit network will ding them less ystem will help ar the State’s Smto ride public tranmissions in the y/Brown Administhe State of Marylies and metropolTrain and Comm

gton, D.C.

Malley/Brown Admnitiatives designegton and Baltimo

ridges on the statists and other sys

ovements

esses and visitorsm work, school o

help working famexpensive trans

address global clmart, Green and nsportation, it tranair and a healthtration is committland also provideitan regions. For muter Bus servi

ministration is agged to meet currere regions. The

te’s highway syststem users.

s need a dependar other activities

milies keep more sportation optionlimate change anGrowing initiativ

nslates into fewerhier environmentted to doubling tes funding for tra

longer commuteices to downtow

gressively movingnt and future denext generation

tem to ensure saf

able and affordabeach day. A goomoney in the ban

ns. A good publnd will serve as ves. When peopr cars on the roa. That is why thtransit ridership bnsit in rural area

es, MDOT providewn Baltimore an

g forward with neemand in both thof transit include

fe

le od nk lic a

ple d,

he by s,

es nd

ew he es

the Puthe Red The BconnecCentersystemcreate Baltimothe Cityemploylocationof the SquareWest BLine wjob opp The PbetweeMontgoMontgoinnovatand theLine wother trwell aslines an Priorit The OMarylaGrowinpassedinitiativfor cosustainpromotand othaddrescoordin

rple Line and Cod Line Transitway

altimore Red Linct Woodlawn to r to the east. Th

m, MARC stationsa comprehensive

ore region. It will y and suburbs toyment centers. Ins such as HarboRed Line has th

e Mall, EdmondsoBaltimore MARC ill improve accesportunities at Fort

urple Line is a en New Carrolltomery County. omery County Mtive design techne Purple Line to

will directly serve ransit services, ps the Green and Ond local bus serv

ty: Smart, Gree

O’Malley/Brown And’s Smart Gro

ng initiative and d by the Marylaves provide a framoordinating with nable patterns ofte new measuresher commuter op

ss air emissions, wnate with other a

rridor Cities Trany in the Baltimore

ne is a 14.5-milthe west and th

he Red Line links, the Baltimore Me regional transit provide the regiogether serving exIt also will suppor East, Canton Che potential to son Village, Highlastation. By linkin

ss to Washingtont Meade and Abe

light rail line seton in Prince GOn the easter

Master Plan’s Geniques will be use

coexist in a comlocal communiti

particularly both bOrange lines; MA

vices.

en and Growin

Administration haowth legacy by

by supporting and General Asmework for addre

other stakehof future growth. s and mechanismptions; to establiswater quality andagencies and par

nsitway in the Wae region.

le, east-west lighe Johns Hopkinks the existing BMetro subway and

network that is uon’s first cross-toxisting residentialport emerging neCrossing and Uplspur revitalizationandtown, Greektong with the MAR

n, D.C. and to groerdeen.

erving a 16-mileGeorge’s Countyn end, it will

eorgetown Brancd to allow the hik

mmunity-friendly-mes and provide

branches of the MARC’s Brunswick

ng

as given new enlaunching the the Sustainable

ssembly in 2010essing transportaolders toward s

This focus hasms: to encouragesh a broader sustd other environmertners to more st

ashington region a

ht rail line that ns Bayview MedBaltimore Light Rd local bus routes

unprecedented in own rail route andl neighborhoods aew developmentlands. The presen efforts at Secuown and around

RC system, the Rowing BRAC-rela

e east-west corry and Bethesdaoperate along

ch alignment, whker-biker trail manner. The Puan important link

Metrorail Red Line, Camden and P

nergy and focusSmart, Green

e Communities A0. These statewation challenges asmarter and m enabled MDOT

e rideshare, telewtainability agendaental impacts; andtrategically lever

4

and

will dical Rail s to the

d tie and t at nce urity the

Red ated

idor a in

the here

rple k to e as enn

s to and Act,

wide and

more T to work a to d to age

investmethe preseand the planned MDOT hgoals forexisting sridershipTask Foras our aMDOT caccessiband transGreener forward. Priority Transit-oensure esmart groriented”and orieprojects of pedeautomobresidentstransportreduce h MDOT wpre-devepartnershDepartmprojects, with otheopportunland-useIn 2010,TOD asdesignatannounc

ent. The Smart, Gervation of resoupromotion of cotransit stations.

has devoted partr increasing transervices, and pla

p is transit orientrce for the Futureanticipated coordcontinues to wo

bility and promotesit. Governor O’MWay to Go” will s

: Transit-Orien

oriented developmefficient use of orowth developme” is typically compnted to maximizdesign street netw

estrians and bicbiles, buses and s achieve maximutation infrastructu

highway congestio

works with State, elopment planninhips, infrastructuent has an activspanning multip

er agencies andnities and to prome policies. the O’Malley/Br

s part of its Sming 14 transit

ced in June 2010,

Green and Growurce lands, the reompact, mixed-us

ticular attention sit ridership. Thi

anning for systemted developmente for Growth anddination with the ork toward proge transportation aMalley’s first everserve as an addit

nted Developm

ment (TOD) is aour transportatioent for the Stateprised of a mixturze visibility and aworks and parkincyclists, while e

carpoolers. TOum benefit for theure. By contributon, greenhouse g

local and privateg, policy and pr

ure investments ve program of TOle jurisdictions an local jurisdictionmote principles o

rown Administratmart, Green, anstations as Tra

, these station are

wing Initiative alsoevitalization of exise development

to achieving Gos effort has focu

m expansion. A ket. Through our in Development inSustainable Gro

grams and policalternatives such r statewide trails tional guide to m

ment (TOD)

a key componenn system to proe. A developmenre of land uses geaccess to the trang to ensure the sensuring efficienD will help ensueir investment in ting to transit rid

gas emissions an

e partners to suprogram support;

and other projOD planning and nd station types.ns to help identiof TOD through

ion took further nd Growing initiansit-Oriented Deas are to be dev

o has encourageisting communitienear existing an

overnor O’Malleyused on improviney to driving transnvolvement in th Maryland, as weowth Commissio

cies that enhancas biking, walkinplan, “Maryland” oving these effor

t of our efforts tomote sustainablnt that is “transenerally configureansit station. TOsafety and comfornt traffic flow ture that Marylantransit and relatedership, TOD cad sprawl.

port TOD througjoint developmeject support. Thjoint-developmeMDOT also workfy additional TOtransit-supportiv

action to promotative by official

Developments. Aveloped as integr

ed es nd

y’s ng sit he ell n, ce ng A

rts

to e, it-ed

OD rt to

nd ed an

h: nt

he nt ks

OD e,

te lly As ral

elemenbenefitagenciexamp2009 leexistingfinance14 destherebyalso en Priorit Providimeet ththe airessent

commitnetworthat bictourismcommitsupporseven

nts of the state’st from legislationes to coordinatele, these designaegislation that grag tax increment e these projects.signated TODs ay, gain more reansures general ov

ty: Bicycle & P

ing safe infrastruheir daily needs r, and a healthieial element of M

tted to improvingrk. Several recencycle and pedes

m activity. MDOTtment to make trted the Governobicycle rides and

s overarching tran which makes e and advance tated TOD sites wants many local gfinancing (TIF) aUnder the 2010 are considered

ady access to othversight by an exp

Pedestrian Trav

ucture so that peresults in fewer c

er Maryland. SupMaryland’s Sma

g facilities for walnt studies have htrian projects caT is working hatrails in Marylandor’s Office in laund a promotional

ansportation ageit easier for bo

their respective will be eligible togovernments greand special taxinSustainable ComSustainable Com

her state programpanded Smart Gr

vel

eople can choosecars on the roadpporting walking rt Growth strate

king and biking ahighlighted the hin have by generard to realize Gd second to nonnching “Cycle Macampaign to enc

enda. They also oth state and loTOD agendas.

o take advantageeater flexibility to ng district powersmmunities Act, thmmunities, and wms. This designarowth Sub-Cabine

e to walk or bike, fewer emissionand bicycling is

egy, and MDOT

across the statewigh economic retrating both jobs aGovernor O’Mallee. This year MDaryland”, a seriescourage all types

5

will ocal For

e of use s to ese will, tion et.

e to s in an

T is

wide turn and ey’s

DOT s of s of

cycling thbicyclinga high qu MDOT inwhereveadditionamillion foin 2011 options awill direcbikewaysTrails Plprogram connectistate another depipeline network Priority MDOT rboundarichange. larger cotransportour naturadaptive By coordin other awe make The goalsystem increasintelecommMarylandgreenhou

hroughout the sta are affordable truality of life in Ma

ncludes accommor possible, and hal funding to walkor bicycle and pedthat directs $13 at key points in oct $6 million to s program will prlan and the Bicwill fill missing li

ng and extendingd improving con

estinations. It wilfor high priority for this Smart, Gr

: Natural Envir

recognizes the ies. As our climOur commitmen

ommitment to a mtation system to ral, cultural and c.

dinating land-use,agencies and loce will meet multipl

l of environmentain ways that im

ng transit ridersmuting, biking, wd’s environment use gas emission

ate. With househravel options that aryland.

odation for walkinhas launched sevking and biking. Tdestrian projects.million for pedes

our communities, projects that su

rovide needed fuycle and Pedesnks in the statewg on-road and o

nnections to tranll leverage local bikeway projectsreen and Growing

ronment

need to work wmate changes, tht to Environment

more sustainablebe resilient and

community resour

, transportation acal governments, le needs for the c

al stewardship is mprove and restship and supporalking and interc

by reducing thns and reducing th

hold budgets streare becoming ev

ng and bicycling inveral programs spThis draft CTP in. This includes a strian access to t

and a new bikewupport bicycle trunding to implemtrian Access Pla

wide trails and bikoff-road bicycle fansit, work, schoo and federal fun

s that will create g mode of travel.

within a framewhose boundariestal Stewardship i future. That futuour strategies fo

rces to be forward

and resource planMDOT will ensu

citizens of Maryla

to pursue projecttore environmentrting greater uscity passenger rahe use of fosshe need for more

essed, walking anven more critical t

n all of its projectpecifically directincludes almost $8program launche

transit, sustainabways program thransportation. Th

ment the Statewidan. The bikewaykeways network bacilities across thols, shopping, annding to create a safe, integrate

work of ecologics will continue tis one aspect of ure will require ouor the protection d-looking and

nning with partnere the investmennd.

ts and operate outal conditions. B

se of ridesharinail, we will improvsil fuels, lowerine paved surfaces.

nd to

ts, ng 80 ed le at

he de ys by he nd a

ed

cal to a

ur of

rs ts

ur By g, ve ng

Using Restorimpactsconserthe latmeetin

Priorit MDOT and mMDOT alternaElectricevaluatelectrictranspoof transthe poregion.hybrid legislat

the State’s Gation priorities as and use prorvation goals. Retest stormwater mg our water quali

ty: Climate Cha

is working to admanage energy c

continues to imative to single occ Vehicle Councte and recommen

c vehicles and eortation infrastrucsportation and en

ossibility of insta The State contand flex-fuel ve

tion in 2007, th

Green Infrastructas a guide, MDOoject mitigation trofitting older pamanagement tecty targets.

ange, Air Qua

ddress Climate Cconsumption relaprove its public t

ccupant vehicles.cil, a legislativend strategies to f

electric vehicle incture. MDOT is wnvironmental agelling electric vehinues to build itsehicle fleets. Whe State has a

ture Plan and OT agencies can

to support tharts of the transpochnology moves

lity & Energy

Change issues, reated to the trantransportation ne In 2011 MDOTly created bodyfacilitate the succ

nfrastructure into working with othencies across the

hicle recharging s hybrid-electric ith the passage

adopted the cle

Chesapeake Bn minimize negahe State’s broaortation network wthe State close

educe air emissinsportation indusetwork to provideT will be staffing y that will devecessful integration

Maryland’s exiser state departmeNortheast to assstations across bus technology a

e of the Clean aner California

6

Bay ative ader with r to

ons stry. e an

the lop, n of ting

ents sess

the and Car car

7

standards beginning with the 2011 model year. MDOT has installed electric vehicle recharging stations for public use at several locations including MDOT headquarters, BWI Marshall Airport and a park and ride lot near I-95 north of Baltimore City. By paving the way for broader usage of cleaner vehicles, these efforts will help us reduce greenhouse gas emissions and contribute to our long-term efforts to fight climate change. MDOT uses a variety of Travel Demand Management (TDM) strategies to support alternatives to driving alone and to limit emissions from the transportation sector. TDM efforts can also help reduce congestion, lower commuting costs, and improve air quality. Some of these efforts are: carpooling, car sharing, transit, teleworking, and variable pricing infrastructure. MDOT is implementing these strategies in cooperation with our partners in the metropolitan planning organizations, the Maryland Department of the Environment, local governments and the private and not-for-profit sectors. We are working closely with the Maryland Department of the Environment and our sister agencies to develop a draft Green House Gas Reduction Plan. Priority: BRAC In the fall of 2005, Congress approved a set of recommendations to realign and reposition numerous military bases in the United States. The Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) effort is scheduled to take full effect by September 2011, and Maryland is one of a few states that will gain additional military and civilian positions as a result. An estimated 40,000 to 60,000 direct, indirect and induced jobs are projected to arrive in Maryland over the next 10 years in connection with BRAC. Fort George G. Meade (FGGM), Aberdeen Proving Ground (APG) and the National Naval Medical Center (NNMC) at Bethesda will gain most of these positions. Other installations, including Joint Base Andrews Naval Air Facility and Fort Detrick, also are expected to see significant increases in personnel stemming from BRAC and non-BRAC related growth. Under the leadership of Governor O’Malley and Lt. Governor Brown, State and local agencies have collaborated to ensure that Maryland can accommodate anticipated growth in a manner that preserves and enhances our State’s resources and our citizens’ quality of life. In 2007, Governor O’Malley created the BRAC Subcabinet, chaired by the Lt. Governor, to oversee the State’s BRAC preparations. MDOT’s work is performed in concert with the Subcabinet and is documented in a dedicated section of the State of Maryland’s BRAC Action Plan, which outlines policies, projects and legislation necessary for Maryland to effectively prepare for BRAC. Since its

adoption, MDOT has tracked appropriate performance measures as part of the State’s BRAC Stat monitoring program. To address transportation impacts associated with BRAC, MDOT has coordinated with local governments, military installations, and our regional, State and federal partners. Given the limited time and funding available to advance improvements, MDOT has employed a “high/low” investment strategy aimed at implementing both short-term (“low”) capital projects, such as key intersection improvements, transit projects, and transportation demand management programs. At the same time we have been developing long-term (“high”), higher cost initiatives. These more expensive projects include long-term corridor improvements near military installations, transit oriented development, the MARC Growth and Investment Plan, and other major capital improvements that project to support BRAC, regional and statewide growth. As part of this effort, MDOT has assisted local governments in evaluating BRAC-related transportation projects in the context of overall needs and long-term planning initiatives. We also have collaborated with stakeholder groups at each of the impacted military installations to develop a schedule of priority projects to implement based on current, as well as potential future, available funding. MDOT continues to work with its partners to advance priority projects in concert with the scheduled BRAC consolidations, and to collaborate in identifying and procuring additional programming dollars. The transportation section of the State BRAC Action Plan (see www.brac.maryland.gov) contains more detailed information concerning MDOT’s BRAC initiatives. Priority: Freight Freight activity in Maryland is expected to double by 2030. The state’s location at the geographic epicenter of the I-95 Corridor means that the expected growth in freight will produce significant capacity constraints to traffic on highways and railways. While freight is expected to grow, chokepoints and aging infrastructure are impacting Maryland and the entire Northeast Corridor (NEC) and impeding the current flow of freight. These chokepoints create significant challenges for freight movement in the region, and can also have significant impacts on passenger rail operations for the NEC and, locally, for MARC commuter rail operations and capacity. We must address these challenges in order to accommodate freight demand and allow

for the cand moto To meeimplemestate regpolicy anstakeholdsuch as t

By devestakeholdeconomiand helpa State nationwidfreight a(FSAC). logistics advice o

cost-effective andor carrier provide

et these needs,nting multimodal

gion. MDOT recond is working to cders and nonprothe I-95 Corridor

P

eloping these ders, MDOT hac stimulus funds

ped the State impRail Plan. Mar

de by being onend by creating aThis committee entities that revien legislation and

d safe movemenrs.

MDOT is takfreight solutions

ognizes the needcultivate partnershofits, and participCoalition.

Photo by Bill McAllen

partnerships anas been able tos. These funds hplement elementsryland continuese of the first stata standing Freigh

includes industrew freight planninprojects.

t of goods by w

king an aggressin Maryland and to better coordihips with neighbopate in freight st

Photography

nd increasing o secure federahave supported ms of the Statewides to lead freightes to address la

ht Stakeholder Adry representativesng and policy act

waterborne, rail, a

sive approach d the greater multnate planning an

oring states, freigtudies with group

coordination witl support througmajor rail projece Freight Plan ant planning efforand use issues dvisory Committes from freight antivities and provid

air

to ti-nd ht ps

th gh cts nd rts in

ee nd de

Priorit The naCountrstruggloperatia long-they hCongrefederalincreasdelays surfaceauthoriprogram Marylabenefitpassedapron funds tnew plArea Tmillion prioritycountieserviceto MPAreceivegrants is on pthe CT In ordeworkingis workcapital

ty: Economic D

ation’s weak ecory, and while Mes continue. Curing on a short-ter-term authorizatiave no revenue essional leaders l spending but reses and tax refo

in passage of e transportation izations complicm.

nd did receive nuted several projecd, US DOT awarresurfacing. Moreto replace the Batform and fourth

Transportation Plto construct the

y bus corridor ees. Smaller grante, to MTA for greeA for port secured grants througfor $3.75 millionage A-48 and is dP.

er to create theg and to continueking to spend fedeprogram.

Development a

onomy is continuaryland is bette

rrently the Federarm extension. Theon proposal withoptions identifie

continue to debaemain split over orms. Unfortunaa new aviation

authorization.ates the state’s

umerous discretiocts in the short terded $15 million e recently Marylaaltimore and Poth track at BWI Rlanning Board aTakoma/Langley

nhancements in ts were awarded enhouse gas andrity work totaling

gh the US Envir. Additional infordesignated on th

e greatest econe to improve the Seral money as qu

and Economic

ing to create cher off than someal Highway and Te Obama Adminihin their FFY 20ed to fund the pate the future rolethe scale of spe

ately this inactionauthorization as The lack of

s ability to stre

onary grants throuerm. Shortly aftein grant funding

and received $60tomac Tunnel an

Rail Station. As ppplication, Maryly Transit Center

Prince George’to Baltimore City

d energy reductiog $3.4 million. Mronmental Protecrmation about ARe individual proje

omic benefit, toState’s transportauickly as possible

Recovery

allenges across e other states,

Transit programs stration has outli

012 budget howeproposed increase, size and scopending cuts, reven has led to furts well as a broaf these necess

engthen our cap

ugh ARRA that hr the legislation wg to BWI Airport 0.0 million in desnd $9.4 million fopart of a Washingand received $1and $2.5 million

’s and Montgomy for their water n improvements

MPA and SHA action Agency ARRRA funded projeect pages through

o keep Marylandation network, MDe while preserving

8

the our are ned

ever ses. e of nue ther ader sary pital

ave was

for sign or a gton 12.3 for

mery taxi and also

RRA ects hout

ders DOT g its

9

Chapter 725 Implementation Chapter 725 in Maryland State Law (2010) required additional clarity and standards to define how the Department evaluates and selects proposed major capital projects for inclusion in the Construction Program of the Consolidated Transportation Program (CTP). Over the last year MDOT has refined its processes to address the requirements in the law. MDOT’s evaluation has resulted in enhanced processes and procedures to clarify how projects are added into the CTP, including how state transportation projects requested in Priority Letters support local government land use plan goals. As part of this effort MDOT developed a diagram of the CTP process. You can see that the CTP takes nearly a full year to create, and this process and its milestones are outlined generally in the diagram below.

Specific changes include:

1. Provide improved guidance to counties on the submission of priority letters. MDOT will provide more explicit guidance to local jurisdictions on the timing and content of priority letters. This guidance will consist of the following: • Establishment of a preferred submission date for full

consideration in the development of the draft CTP (i.e., priority letter submission by April 1 to enable consideration of county priorities by modal administrations as they identify projects);

• Encourage multi-modal submissions to enable local governments to have a greater impact on all state transportation investment

decisions. MDOT will encourage counties to provide input for all modal investments (this guidance will also highlight the competing demands for investment to help MDOT manage expectations about what it can reasonably deliver);

• MDOT will provide guidance to the local governments regarding the official endorsement by local elected officials and local elected bodies.

2. Provide guidance that will enable local jurisdictions to detail how their project supports the goals of the Maryland Transportation Plan and is consistent with county land use plans. Both MDOT and local governments would benefit if county requests are aligned with Maryland’s transportation vision, and if project requests provide MDOT with a stronger and more transparent rationale that explains the purpose of the request from the perspective of the local government.

10

FINANCING MARYLAND’S TRANSPORTATION PRIORITIES In developing the CTP and establishing funding levels, the Secretary and MDOT must account for both State and local economic growth, projections of state transportation revenue and allocations of federal funding. The State’s Transportation Trust Fund supports MDOT investments through a dedicated account. Being heavily influenced by State and national economic performance, the Trust Fund has experienced a number of funding challenges in recent years that have deeply impacted the Department’s decision-making process. While uncertainty regarding the status of federal transportation legislation and funding levels is high, Maryland continues to work with the federal government and to rely on it as an important source of funding. MDOT is committed to working with available resources and investing in a most cost-effective, responsible manner that will constantly improve our transportation system while respecting our state’s fiscal challenges.

State Revenue Projections Over the last few years, MDOT has had to assume a very different revenue picture to develop the Consolidated Transportation Program (CTP). The nationwide economic downturn continues to have an enormous impact on the revenue projections for both the State of Maryland and for MDOT. Despite these challenges, Maryland’s transportation system has felt less impact from the revenue decline than many other states, because of the efforts of the Administration and the General Assembly to institute an increase in transportation revenue in 2007. The revenue added has allowed for capital investments already under construction to continue and support some safety and system preservation projects, but to a much lesser extent than expected. Due to the remaining ARRA formula and discretionary funding and increased funding from the 2011 legislative session adjustments we have been able to maintain a $9.9 billion six-year capital program and continue funding many of our safety and system preservation projects. Total projected revenues amount to $20.9 billion for the six-year period. This estimate is based on the revenue sources used by MDOT and includes bond proceeds and federal funds that will be used for operating, capital and debt payment expenses. The projection does not assume any future State tax or fee increases beyond those changes enacted in prior sessions. Pertinent details are as follows:

• Opening Balance: MDOT’s goal is to maintain a $100 million fund balance over the program period to accommodate working cash flow requirements throughout the year.

• Motor Vehicle Fuel Tax: This revenue is projected to be $4 billion over

the six year period. Motor fuel taxes include the 23.5 cents per gallon gasoline and the 24.25 cents per gallon diesel fuel.

• Motor Vehicle Titling Tax: This source is projected to yield $4.4 billion.

The titling tax of 6.0 percent of the fair market value of motor vehicles, less an allowance for trade-in vehicles, is applied to new and used vehicles sold and to vehicles of new residents. This revenue source follows the cycle of auto sales with periods of decline and growth. Following the recent down cycle, vehicle sales have stabilized and titling tax revenues are starting to recover. It is projected that this six-

8.2 7.7 

9.0  9.2  8.9 

10.6 

8.5 9.1  9.5 

9.9 

$0

$2

$4

$6

$8

$10

$12

03‐08 04‐09 05‐10 06‐11 07‐12 08‐13 09‐14 10‐15 11‐16 12‐17

Dollars in

 Billions

Six Year CTP Program (FY)

Maryland Department of TransportationTOTAL CAPITAL PROGRAM LEVELS

STATE FEDERAL OTHER

11

year planning period will follow a normal business cycle around an underlying upward trend.

• Motor Vehicle Registration/Miscellaneous, and Other Fees: These

fees are projected to generate $3.4 billion. This forecast assumes revenues will increase an average of 3.0 percent every two-year cycle.

• Sales and Use Tax: MDOT began receiving a portion of the State’s

6.0 percent general sales and use tax in fiscal year 2009. During the 2011 session of the Maryland General Assembly, legislation was enacted that eliminated MDOT’s distribution effective fiscal year 2012.

• Corporate Income Tax: The transportation share of corporate income

tax revenues is estimated to be $737 million. Legislation enacted during the 2011 session of the Maryland General Assembly altered the portion of the State’s 8.25 percent corporate income tax that MDOT receives. MDOT’s share will be 20.4 percent for fiscal year 2012, 8 percent for fiscal year 2013, 16.6 percent for fiscal years 2014-2016, and 14.6 percent for each fiscal year thereafter.

• Federal Aid: This source is projected to contribute $3.9 billion for

operating and capital programs. This amount does not include $576 million received directly by the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority (WMATA). The majority of federal aid is capital; only $513 million is for operating assistance. Since federal aid supports a significant portion of the capital program, a more detailed discussion of federal aid assumptions is presented in the next section of this summary.

• Operating Revenues: These revenues are projected to provide a six-

year total of $2.4 billion, with $857 million from MTA; $261 million from MPA; and $1.3 billion from MAA. MTA revenues primarily include rail and bus fares. MPA revenues include terminal operations, the World Trade Center, and other Port related revenues. MAA revenues include flight activities, rent and user fees, parking, airport concessions, and other aviation-related fees.

• Bond Proceeds: It is projected that $1.7 billion of bonds will be sold in

the six-year period. The level of bonds that could be issued is dependent on the net revenues of MDOT. This level of bonds is affordable within the financial parameters used by MDOT.

• Other Sources: The remaining sources are projected to provide $357 million. These sources include earned interest from trust funds, reimbursements, and miscellaneous revenues.

FEDERAL AID ASSUMPTIONS The Safe, Accountable, Flexible, and Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU) Act authorized highway, transit, rail and safety programs through Federal Fiscal Year (FFY) 2009. SAFETEA-LU provided $286.5 billion nationally over six years and has been extended by Congress from September 30, 2009, until March 31, 2012, while it debates the policies and financing mechanisms to be contained in the next act. Since FFY 2004, Maryland has received approximately $585 million annually for highways and $140 million annually for transit formula programs (including WMATA’s allocation for Maryland service). This level of funding is no longer guaranteed as Congress looks to cut back on federal spending. It is important to note that not all of the funding authorized in the surface transportation legislation is necessarily new or additive money for Maryland. Our Consolidated Transportation Program (CTP) allocates federal funds to projects in the Program based on conservative projections for future federal funding. The majority of funds authorized by SAFETEA-LU were used for projects already committed in our capital program and for unfunded system preservation needs. Continued delays in the enactment of the next surface transportation authorization bill and the uncertainty over the long-term solvency of the federal Highway Trust Fund (HTF) have constrained MDOT’s ability to adequately plan for future investments throughout the State. Since FFY 2009, Congress added approximately $35 billion in general funds to the HTF in order to protect against projected shortfalls, but additional general fund transfers are increasingly unlikely. If Congress is unable to find the revenue to prevent a future deficit, they will be forced to reduce the amount of federal aid provided to states. This action would have a dramatic impact on programs that are currently funded in the CTP. The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012 includes language to increase the availability of federal funding in support of BRAC-impacted transportation needs.

Highwa Federal funds auwhich degiven yeimposed Under SAfiscal conCTP assThis is m

Transit The majformula. same fuFTA UrbSmall Umoderniz2012. AdditionaMarylandCorridor recently intent is from fede Washin WMATA and rail

ays

highway programthorized and app

etermine how muear. This ceiling i

by Congress anAFETEA-LU, OA ncerns with the ssumes an OA lev

much lower than th

jority of MarylanIn the absence onding levels aut

banized Area capUrban Systems zation funding fo

al federal fundid’s New Starts pCities Transitwabeen approved to seek at least eral funding.

ngton Metropol

receives federa preservation a

ms are authorizeportioned to the stch of the authorizs referred to as nnually in responhas ranged from

soundness of thevel of 80 percenthe OA level recei

nd’s federal tranof new authorizatihorized by SAFEital assistance fois estimated at

or Maryland is e

ing will be reqprojects: the Puay. Both the Re

to enter Prelim50 percent of the

litan Area Tran

l formula funds (activities. In 20

ed by multiple-yetates are subject zed money can bObligational Aut

nse to prevailingm 84 percent to 93e Federal Highwat for FFY 2012 thived for FFY 2011

nsit funds are aon legislation, weETEA-LU for FFor Baltimore, MARt $82.2 million estimated at $38

quested for the urple Line, the Red Line and the inary Engineerine cost of the Pur

nsit Authority —

(80 percent fede10, Congress p

ar legislation. Thto annual ceiling

be obligated in anthority (OA) and g economic polic3 percent. Givenay Trust Fund, thhrough FFY 2011 of 93 percent.

lso distributed be must assume thY 2012. As sucRC, D.C. area an

for FFY12. Ra8.4 million in FF

development Red Line and thPurple Line havg.    Currently, ourple and Red line

— WMATA

eral share) for bupassed legislatio

he s,

ny is

cy.

his 7.

by he h, nd ail

FY

of he ve ur es

us on

amendadditiofor thefederalmatchefully suNation’($50 mMaryladate, tpromis As requthe WMthe Pre Aviatio The FePrograairport enplanThurgo AIP fuprogrammade (PFC). The Madiscretyear prRunwathe viaanticipaproject Congrebasic fpurposand sigfundedmeet M

ding the Nationanal federal contr

e WMATA systeml money over 1ed by Maryland, Vupportive of the e’s transit system.million each yeand’s initial matchhe federal govere by providing the

uired by the Act, MATA Compact; esident signed the

on

ederal Aviation Am (AIP), provideprojects. It is a

ement and carood Marshall Inter

nding will total $3m period. This ledue to BWI’s a

aryland Aviation ionary AIP fundinrogram period. F

ay Safety Areas. able options, theated discretionaryts will be adjusted

ess is currently wframework is co

ses. The MAA agned into law to kd by FAA. MAA Maryland’s needs

al Capital Transpributions for reham. This legislati0 years. These Virginia and the Deffort to secure a To this end, this

ar in federal fising contribution rrnment and the te first two installm

all three jurisdictithese amendme

e amendments in

dministration (FAes federal entitlessumed that entgo-based formurnational Airport (

3.5 to $4.0 millionevel of entitlemenbility to collect a

Administration (Mng for BWI and

FAA plans to finanFollowing an envese improvemeny funds are not fod accordingly.

working on the romplete and doeand MDOT suppkeep personnel w

and MDOT will.

portation Act of abilitation and repon authorized ufederal funds n

District of Columbadditional financis CTP includes a scal years 2012required by the fethree jurisdictionments in FFY 201

ions passed idenents were ratifiednto law on August

AA), through the Aement and discretitlement funding las for the Ba(BWI).

n per year for BWnt is the net amoa $4.50 Passen

MAA) anticipates Martin State Airpncially support fuvironmental assests must be com

orthcoming, the s

reauthorization ofes not increaseort getting a rea

working and maincontinue to wor

1969 to authoplacement of capp to $1.5 billionneed to be equbia. MDOT has beal resources for total of $300 milthrough 2017)

ederal legislation. s have fulfilled t0 and FFY 2011

tical amendmentd by Congress; at 19, 2009.

Airport Improvemetionary funding is calculated us

ltimore Washing

WI during the six-yount after reductinger Facility Cha

receipt of additioports during the unding needs for ssment to determ

mpleted by 2015schedule of impac

f FAA programs e funds for aviaauthorization pasntain programs berk with Congress

12

rize pital n of ually een the lion as

To heir .

ts to and

ment for

sing gton

year ons

arge

onal six-the

mine 5. If cted

the tion sed eing s to

13

WHERE THE MONEY COMES FROM… Maryland’s transportation system is funded through several dedicated taxes and fees, federal aid, operating revenues, and bond sales, which are assigned to the Transportation Trust Fund. This fund is separate from the State’s General Fund, which pays for most other State government operations and programs. MDOT’s customers pay user fees for transportation infrastructure and services through motor fuel taxes, vehicle titling taxes, registration fees, operating revenues, and corporate income taxes. The motor fuel tax and vehicle titling tax are the two largest sources of MDOT revenue. Operating revenues include transit fares and usage fees generated at the Port of Baltimore and the BWI Thurgood Marshall Airport. In addition to collecting revenue within the state, Maryland also receives federal aid for its transportation program. These federal funds must be authorized by a congressional act. The United States Congress last enacted long term federal surface transportation authorizing legislation in August 2005. The current act expired on September 30, 2009, but has been extended by Congress to allow for continued investment in transportation infrastructure.

Total projected Trust Fund revenues amount to $20.9 billion for the six-year period covered by this CTP. These amounts are based on the assumption that the economy will continue to recover and continue along a moderate growth scenario for the next six years.

WHERE THE MONEY GOES… The MDOT program is fiscally constrained, meaning that the list of projects is tied to estimates of future revenue. The Trust Fund supports operation and maintenance of State transportation systems, administration, debt service and capital projects. A portion of these funds is directed to the General Fund and a share is also dispersed among Maryland’s counties and Baltimore City for local transportation needs. After operating costs, debt service, and local distributions, the remaining money goes toward funding capital projects. This document, Maryland’s CTP, is the six-year capital budget for all State transportation projects. This FY 2012-2017 CTP totals about $9.9 billion; $8.9 billion of which comes through the Trust Fund and $1.0 billion from “Other” fund sources.

Federal Aid19%

Other2%

Motor Fuel Taxes20%

Vehicle Titling Taxes20%

Registrations and MVA Fees

18%

Corporate Income Taxes

4%

Operating10% Bonds

7%

Where The Money Comes From

MDOT Capital Expenditures

42%

MDOT Operating

Expenditures45%

Local Govt's and General

Fund7%

Debt Service6%

Where The Money Goes

EVAL In 2000, develop Performa

• toM

• to th

• to

Capital

TSO MVA MAA** MPA MTA WMATASHA TOTAL

* FundTransportFacility Ch ** Proje TSO – TraMVA – MoMAA – MaMPA – MaMTA – MaWMATA –SHA – Sta

LUATING

the Maryland Gan Annual Atta

ance. The main o

o report on progreMaryland Transpo

o establish perforhese objectives; a

o set long-term an

Expenditures

FY

STATE FUNDS

172.6 107.7 248.3 732.9 850.3

A 891.7 2,524.6 5,528.2

ds not received throtation Authority (Mharges (CFC) and f

cts using non-trust

ansportation Secreotor Vehicle Adminaryland Aviation Adaryland Port Adminaryland Transit Adm– Washington Metroate Highway Admin

OUR PERF

General Assemblyainment Report

objectives of the A

ess toward achiertation Plan and t

rmance indicatorsand

nd intermediate-t

Y 2012 – 2017 CT

($ MILLIOFEDERAL

AID O

60.0 0.8

75.0 7.2

1,093.3 0.0

2,108.7 3,344.9

ough the Trust FundMdTA), Passengefederal funds receiv

fund financing sou

etary’s Office istration

dministration nistration ministration opolitan Area Transnistration

FORMANC

y passed a bill r(AR) on Trans

AR are:

ving the goals anthe CTP;

s that quantify ach

term performance

TP SUMMARY ONS)

OTHER* TOT

- - 391.1

0.0 50.1 1,

575.9 1,4,

1,017.1 9,

d. Includes some fr Facility Chargesved directly by WM

urces are included i

sit Authority

CE

requiring MDOT tsportation Syste

nd objectives in th

hievement of

e targets.

TAL PERCENOF TOT

232.6 2108.6 714.4 740.0 993.7 2467.6 14633.4 4890.2 10

funds from Marylans (PFC), Custom

MATA.

n the total.

to m

he

NT TAL 2.41.17.27.50.24.86.80.0

nd er

The pethe STranspReportperformits tran

erformance measSecretary’s Officportation Authoritt documents how mance indicators sportations syste

ures were develoce, the modaty and the AR-AMDOT is achievand helps Maryla

em.

oped in a collaboral administrationAdvisory Committing its goals and and citizens asse

rative effort betwens, the Marylatee. The Attainmobjectives based

ess improvement

14

een and

ment d on s to

15

HOW TO READ THIS DOCUMENT The Maryland Department of Transportation (MDOT) is organized into agencies responsible for different modes of travel. These are referred to as MDOT’s modal agencies, or modes. Projects in the Consolidated Transportation Program (CTP) are listed under the mode responsible for the project’s delivery. For each major project, there is a Project Information Form (PIF). Each PIF contains a description of the project, its status, its justification, its compliance status with smart growth and a brief explanation of how it fits with the goals of the Maryland Transportation Plan. It also shows any significant change in the project since the previous year’s CTP, as well as the funding for the project over the six-year cycle. The information in each PIF is meant to provide a general description of the project along with some specifics such as alignments, status of environmental permitting, or alternatives under study. Funding Phases Planning – Once a proposal is funded for project planning, detailed studies and analyses are conducted to evaluate the need for the project, to establish the scope and location of proposed transportation facilities and to obtain environmental approvals. Engineering – Engineering projects involved detailed environmental studies and preliminary and final design. Having been through a detailed analysis based on the information from the Project Planning phase these projects are candidates for future addition to the Construction Program. Right-of-Way – This funding is to provide the necessary land for the project or to protect corridors for future projects. Construction – This last stage includes the costs of actually building the designed facility. Total – This is the sum of any funding shown for Planning, Engineering, Right-of-Way and Construction. Federal-Aid – This is the amount of the total that will utilize federal funding.

Construction does not begin until a project receives necessary environmental permits, the State meets air and water quality requirements and the contracts are bid. PIFs can include specific facilities and corridor studies that examine multimodal solutions to transportation needs. One example is the I-270/US 15 multimodal corridor study, which is evaluating highway and transit improvements in Montgomery and Frederick counties. The CTP also contains information on minor projects. These projects are smaller in scope and less costly. They also can include road resurfacing, safety improvements and sidewalk and bicycle trail construction. Following this introduction is an explanation of some of the significant changes from last year’s CTP. This section lists major projects added to the CTP or projects that have advanced to a new stage of development. It also lists changes in construction schedules and projects removed from the CTP. The CTP also includes information regarding the economic trends and assumptions and future revenue projects that inform the capital programming process.