�. Summary of Ta
sk Forc
e Meet
ings
� �Task Force Report� �Task Force Report
Five Task Force meetings were held to present issues affecting traffc capacity across the Chesapeake Bay. The frst three meetings were held in the Maryland Senate Building in Annapolis, and the two remaining meetings were held at the Tidewater Inn in Easton. The frst four Task Force meetings were designed to focus on one or two distinct and related topics. Experts in transportation, planning, and economic development made presentations. Task Force members were given an opportunity to ask questions during and after the presentations. A summary of each meeting was prepared and distributed at the following meeting.
In addition, each member received a Briefng Book prior to the frst meeting, which served as the record of the Task Force process. All handouts were stored in the book. Task Force members kept their Briefng Books between meetings.
A brief summary of the information presented at each meeting is presented on the following pages. Task Force Meeting #5, which is described later in this report, did not include any formal presentations; instead, the purpose of the fnal meeting was to promote discussion of the topics presented previously.
� �Task Force Report� �Task Force Report
ThepurposeofMeeting#1wastokick-offtheTaskForceprocess,allowmemberstomeeteachotherandAuthoritystaff,andtosharedetailedinformationaboutthehistoryoftheBayBridgeanditslocalandregionalsignificance.
MDOTSecretaryRobertFlanaganbeganMeeting#1bywelcomingtheTaskForcemembersanddescribingthetrafficcongestionassociatedwiththeBayBridgeandwhyitiscriticaltotakeactionnow.SecretaryFlanaganexplainedthatconditionsareexpectedtoworsenoverthenexttwentyyearsandthebestavailabledataoffuturetrafficprojectionsmaybeunderestimated.Theprojectdevelopmentprocessiscomplexandcontroversialsoitcouldtakemanyyearsuntilcapacityissuesattheexistingbridgeareresolved.
MarylandTransportationAuthorityExecutiveSecretaryTrentKittlemanthenpresentedacomprehensivehistoryofthefirstandsecondspansoftheBayBridgeandtheregionalsignificanceoftheBridge.Ms.KittlemancontinuedwithadiscussionofexistingconditionsandhowtheAuthorityisrespondingtoincreasedtrafficanddelays.
Toillustratethesignificantgrowthintraffic,Ms.Kittelmanpresentedexistingandfutureprojectionsoftrafficdata.Forexample,theannualtrafficontheBayBridgein1952(whenthefirstbridgewasoriginallyopenedtotraffic)was1.1millionvehicles.In2004,25millionvehiclescrossedtheBayBridge.Ms.Kittlemanalsoexplainedsomeofthereasonsfortrafficdelaysatthebridge.Forexample,theUS50eastboundandwestboundapproachestotheBridge,eachthreelaneswide,haveacapacityof6,000vehiclesperhour.However,thebridgespanscancarryonly4,500vehiclesperhour.
DemandforcapacityacrosstheBayisattributedtothelocationandtypesofemploymentcentersontheWesternShoreascomparedtoemploymentavailableon
theEasternShore.Morethan11,000peoplecommutefromEasternShoretoWesternShorecounties,BaltimoreCityandWashington,D.Ceachday.Morethan2,000peoplecommutefromWesternShoretoEasternShorecountiesdaily.Trucktrafficconstitutes14percentofthevehiclestravelingonweekdays.Thestatewideaveragefortrucktrafficonthistypeofroadway(anurbanarterialroad)isfourpercent.TheBayBridgecarries53percentmoretrafficonsummerweekenddays(95,000vehicles)thanonweekdays(61,000vehicles).
Anorigin-destination(O-D)surveywasconductedin2001todeterminetravelpatternsassociatedwiththeBayBridge.Surveyswereconductedfortheeastbounddirectiononasummerweekendday(SaturdayinAugust)andforan“average”weekday(WednesdayinOctober)tocaptureseasonalvariationsintrafficcrossingtheBridge.TheO-Dstudyshowedmostofthesummerweekendtraffic
Summary of Task Force Meetings
Meeting # 1 – The Bay Bridge: Yesterday, Today, and Tomorrow
� �Task Force Report� �Task Force Report
SummerWeekendDay
Non-SummerWeekday
Origin:Baltimore 50% 70%
Origin:Washington,DC 50% 30%
Destination:LowerEasternShore 70% 40%
Destination:UpperEasternShore 30% 60%
MostCommonTripType Tourist/Recreation Commuter
Table 1: Origin-Destination Study Results
travelingfromtheBaltimore-WashingtonmetropolitanareatothelowerEasternShore.Forweekdaytravel,thestudyshowedthemajorityofeastboundtrafficfromtheBaltimoreregiontravelingtothelowerEasternShoreandQueenAnne’sCounty.Thecompleteresultsofthisstudyarepublishedinthe“Origin-DestinationSurveyReport,Bay&NiceBridgeStudy,”June5,2002.TheOrigin-DestinationSurveyReportincludesadetailedbreakdownofspecificoriginsanddestinations.
Asummary,showingBaltimoreandWashingtonOrigin-DestinationStudyResultsisshownbelowinTable1.
TheAuthorityhasdevelopedseveralinterimstrategiestomaximizebridgecapacityandreducecongestionduringthebusiesttimesduringthesummermonthscalled“TakingtheHeatOutofSummerTravel.”Theprogramreducedpeak-periodtrafficontheBridgebysevenpercentin2005.Theprogramincludedwideningtoll-plazadepartures,usingthewestboundcontra-flowlaneforE-ZPassSMcustomers,aggressivemarketingofE-ZPassSM,extendingtheE-ZPassSMonlylanefromonehalftoonemile,addingmorevehicle-recoverytechnicians,newoverheaddynamicmessagesigns,
Summary of Task Force MeetingsusingshouldersonMD8forlocalresidents,“GoEarly...StayLate”programwiththeDepartmentofBusinessandEconomicDevelopment(DBED),“State-of-the-Bridge”telephonemessagesystem,andenhancedpublicandmediaoutreach.
Inadditiontotheseeffortstoreducetravelduringpeakperiods,theAuthorityusescontra-flowoperationsonthewestboundspanduringpeakperiods.Acontra-flowlaneoperatesinadirectionoppositetothenormalflowoftraffic.ThewestboundspangenerallycarriesthreelanesoftrafficfromKentIslandtotheWesternShore.Whennecessary,onewestboundspanlaneisconvertedtoaneastboundlanetoincreaseeastboundcapacitytothreelanes.TheAuthoritycontinuestodevelopinnovativesolutionstoimprovetrafficflowandalsoworkswithlocalmunicipalities,communities,andotherStateagenciestoeasetrafficconditionsandcreateoptimalflowduringpeakperiods.However,evenwiththesemeasures,thecapacityofthebridgewillnotmeetthefuturedemand.
Meeting#1concludedwithapresentationofa“zone”approachthatwasusedthroughouttheremainingTaskForcemeetings.FourzoneswereoutlinedonamapofMarylandasequallysizedgeographicareassothatinformationcouldbe
� �Task Force Report� �Task Force Report
Table 1: Origin-Destination Study Results
presentedinanorganizedway(Figure3).Thezonesinnowayrepresentedpreferredlocationsforacrossing;theyweremerelyconvenientwaysofpresentinginformation.
TwoareasoftheBaywerenotincludedinanyofthezones.Basedontheinitialsketchleveltravelforecastingmodel,acrossingbetweenHarfordandCecilCountieswoulddivertaverysmallamountoftheexistingBayBridgetrafficandwouldbetooclosetoexistingregionalroutes(I-95,US40).Likewise,acrossingbetweenSt.Mary’sandSomersetCountiesalsowoulddivertonlyasmallamountofthetrafficthatwouldnormallyusetheexistingBayBridge.Thiscrossingwouldrequireconstructioninthedeepestpartofthebaywithextremelylongspansbetweensupportpilesandwouldexceed25milesinlength.TheseareasareshowninFigures1and2.
ThepurposeofMeeting#2wastoeducatetheTaskForcemembersabouttheplanning,design,andconstructionofbridgesandapproachroadways.TheTaskForcewasintroducedtotheconceptofmegaprojects,suchastheIntercountyConnectorandtheWoodrowWilsonBridge,tounderstandtheprocessandscheduleforimplementingcomplex,highprofile,costly,andoftencontroversialprojects.DennisSimpson,theAuthority’sDeputyDirectorofCapitalPlanning,presentedthisportionofthepresentationandgaveabriefoverviewofthesuccessfulprojectdevelopmentprocessusedinMaryland.
GeoffreyKolberg,theAuthority’sExecutiveDirectorofEngineeringandConstructionManagement,presentedinformationonmajorwatercrossings.HefirstdescribedthecharacteristicsoftheBaytoillustratethewiderangeofconstraintsassociatedwitheachzone.Forexample,thewidthoftheChesapeakeBayrangesfromfourmilesattheexistingcrossingto25milesatitsmouthinVirginia.Itswaterdepthrangesfrom10feetinthenorthtoover100feetinthesouth.PoorsoilconditionsmayexistinthesubmergedSusquehannaRiverChannel,theancientriverbedofthiswaterway,possiblyrequiringsubstantialdeepfoundationstosupportanewcrossing.
Meeting #� - Traffic and Infrastructure
Figure 2: Southern Chesapeake BayA crossing between St. Mary’s and Somerset Counties would require construction in the deepest part of the bay with long spans between support piles.
Figure 1: Northern Chesapeake BayA crossing between Harford and Cecil Counties would divert a very small amount of the existing Bay Bridge traffic and would be too close to I-95 and US 40.
GiventhephysicalcharacteristicsoftheChesapeakeBay,threetypesofcrossingsarepossible;bridge,tunnelandferryservice.IntermsofaddingcapacitytotheexitingBridge,theAuthorityhasevaluatedthepossibilityofwideningtheexistingBayBridge.However,theexistingparallelbridgestructureswerenotdesignedtocarrytheadditionalweightofnewsubstructureandsuperstructurenortheadditionaltraffic.Ineffect,wideningtheexistingbridgewouldrequireconstructionofnewsubstructureandsuperstructurethatwouldbeequivalenttoconstructinganewbridgeofsimilarwidth.Usingcurrentengineeringtechnology,anewcrossingcouldbeconstructedinanyofthefourzones.However,assumingabridgecrossingfor
� �Task Force Report� �Task Force Report
Zone 1:BaltimoreCountytoKentCounty(historicnortherncrossing)
Zone 2:AnneArundelCountytoQueenAnne’sCounty(existingBayBridge)
Figure 3: Zone Map
Summary of Task Force Meetings
Zone 3:AnneArundel/CalvertCountiestoTalbotCounty(nearSt.Michaels)
Zone 4:CalvertCountytoDorchesterCounty(historicsoutherncrossing)
ThefourzonespresentedtotheTaskForcearelistedbelowandareshowninFigure3.
� �Task Force Report� �Task Force Report
Summary of Task Force Meetingsthepurposesofanalysis,thecostsforabridgeinZone1wouldlikelybelessthanoneinZones2,3,or4,ascrossingsinthesezoneswouldhavelongermainspanlengthstoaccommodatepoorsoilsandnavigationactivities,deeperfoundationsnecessaryforconstructionwithinthenavigationalchannel,andtotalbridgelengths.Along-spanbridgeprojectcouldcostbetween$600and$900millionpermile(2005dollars).
Thefollowingfeatureswerepresentedforeachzone:
•Crossinglength •Mainspanlengthornavigational
channelwidth •Waterdepthandfoundationrequirements •Structuretypeandpierheight •Verticalclearanceforvesselpassage •Otherissuessuchassecurity,maintenance
costs,economicinterests
Otherfactorswerediscussedforcrossingsingeneralandincludedhomelandsecurity,maintenance,andeconomicconsiderationsforthePortofBaltimore.NavigationissueswouldrequirecoordinationwiththeUnitedStatesCoastGuard.BridgeheightwouldrequirecoordinationwiththeFederalAviationAdministrationandtheDepartmentofDefense.Abridgewouldneedapierprotection
systemtoprotectthebridgesubstructurefromcollisions,althoughlesssubstantialvesselcollision/pierprotectionsystemswouldberequirednorthofthePortofBaltimore(largervesselscannotpassundertheexistingBayBridgeorKeyBridge).MoreprotectionwouldbenecessarywithintheunconstrainednavigationalchannelsouthoftheexistingbridgeforlargemarinevesselsservingthePortofBaltimore,sailingatocean-goingspeeds.Table2summarizestheChesapeakeBaycharacteristicsandpotentialstructuretypes.
Atunnelistypicallyusedinareaswherenavigationrestrictstheplacementofbridgesupports.InthecaseoftheChesapeakeBay,wheresuchconstraintsdonotexist,atunnelcouldbeconstructedincombinationwithbridgestructures,likeVirginia’sChesapeakeBayBridgeTunnelandtheHamptonRoadsBridgeTunnel.Atunnelwouldrequireconstructionofaccessandventilationislandsabovethetunnelandaremoresusceptibletohazardousmaterialspillsandthreatstohomelandsecurity.Atunnelcancostuptothreetimesthecostofabridgeatthesamelocation.
BasedonearlierstudiesconductedbyMDOT,ferryservicewouldprovidesomecapacity,especiallyforrecreationaltravel,butwould
ExistingBridges
Zone1 Zone2 Zone3 Zone4
CrossingLength 4miles 7-9miles 4miles 10-12miles 6-7miles
ChannelWidth 1,500ft 600ft 1,500ft >10,000ft >10,000ft
MainSpanLength 1,600ft 1,200ft 2,000ft 3,000-4,000ft 3,000-4,000ft
WaterDepth 60ft 35ft 60ft 110ft 110ft
Table �: Summary of Long Span Bridge Considerations
10 11Task Force Report10 11Task Force Report
havesignificantlylongercrossingtimes,from55minutesto145minutes.Usercostscouldrangefrom$25to$40forcarsand$75to$110fortrucks.Capacitywoulddependonthenumberofferriesused.Basedonthesestudies,ferryservicewouldprovidecapacityfor25,000to335,000vehiclesperyear(comparedto25millionontheexistingbridge).Regardlessoflocationwithinthestudyarea,aferryservicewouldnotrelievecongestionontheexistingbridge.
NeilPedersen,AdministratorfortheMarylandStateHighwayAdministration,followedwithapresentationontheissuesassociatedwithplanninganddesigningtheapproachroadwaysystemineachzone.Ifacrossingwereselectedinanyofthezones,theadjacentroadwaysmustbesufficienttocarrythetraffictoandfromthecrossing.AsignificantnumberofmilesofroadwayscouldbeaffectedbynewcapacityacrosstheBay,manyofwhicharecurrentlyorareexpectedtobeovercapacityinthefuture.CommunitiesandenvironmentalresourcesexistingalongroadwaysadjacenttotheBaycouldbeaffected.Asketch-leveltraveldemandmodelwasdevelopedaspartoftheTransportationNeedsReport.Thismodelcomputedorderofmagnitudecomparisonsbetweenthezones(thistypeofmodelisnotdetailedenoughfortheanalysisanddesignofanactualcrossing).Basedontheresultsofthemodel,trafficacrossthebridgewillcontinuetoincreasetoalevelwhereweekdaycongestionwillresemblethecongestionthatexistsnowonsummerweekends.Thecapacityoftheexistingbridgeis82,500vehiclesperday.The volumes forecasted for 2025 are 135,000 vehicles per day, which is 60 percent higher than the capacity of the existing bridge and approach roadways.Whenevaluatingeachzone,certainfactorscausetheneedforadditionalinfrastructure.Thetypesofroadwaysatacrossinglocationandtheexistingtraveldemandonthoseroadwaysmaynecessitateinfrastructureimprovements.Existingcontrolsofaccessandtrafficoperations,upgradesornewroadways,interchangeandaccesslocationsandtie-inswithexistingmajorcorridorsalsoaffecttheneedforadditionalinfrastructure.
Summary of Task Force Meetings
10 11Task Force Report10 11Task Force Report
Foreachroadwaysegment,thesketch-levelmodelmeasuredAverageDailyTraffic(ADT),orthetotalnumberofvehiclesusingtheroadwayina24-hourperiod.ThemodelassignsaLevelofService(LOS),oraquantitativemeasureoftrafficoperationalconditionswhichisusedtocomparetheeffectsofano-buildandbuildalternativeonroadwaysadjacenttoeachpossiblecrossing.Rangesofoperationaredefinedforeachtypeofroadwaysection(signalizedintersections,freeways,rampjunctionsandweavingsections)andarerelatedtotheamountoftrafficdemandatagiventimeascomparedtothecapacityofthattypeofroadwaysection.
SixLOSaredefinedforeachtypeofroadwaysectionandaregivenletterdesignationsfrom“A”to“F,”with“A”representinggoodoperatingconditionsand“F”representing
Summary of Task Force Meetings
Zone1 Zone2 Zone3 Zone4
AverageSummerWeekend:
2025ADTDivertedtothisZone 40,000 N/A 50,000 25,000
2025ADTRemainingonExistingBridge 95,000 135,000 85,000 110,000
AverageWeekday:
2025ADTDivertedtothisZone 25,000 N/A 25,000 15,000
2025ADTRemainingonExistingBridge 61,000 85,000 60,000 70,000
Table �: Summary of Projected Traffic Diversions by Zone
unsatisfactoryoperatingconditions.Foreachzone,Mr.PedersenpresentedtheLOSofmajorfeederroadsunderexistingconditions(2003)andfuture(2025)conditionswithandwithoutanewcrossingandagainremindedtheTaskForcemembersofthepreliminarynatureoftheforecasts.AsketchlevelmodelisnotdetailedenoughtobeusedinaformalNEPAstudy,butitcanbeusedtogiveageneralorderofmagnitudeestimateoftrafficprojections.Thesetypesofprojectionsareusefulinunderstandingtrendsofpotentialdiversionoftraffic,butareverypreliminaryinnature.Therefore,thetrafficnumberspresentedtotheTaskForcerepresentapreliminaryestimateofprojectedtrends.AsummaryoftheestimatedtrafficvolumesthatwoulduseanewcrossinginZones1,3or4arepresentedinTable3below.
1� 1�Task Force Report1� 1�Task Force Report
Zone 1 — Forsummertraffic,acrossinginZone1coulddivertapproximately40,000(ADT)fromtheexistingcrossing,buttheexistingcrossingmaystillcarryapproximately95,000(ADT),whichexceedsitscapacity.Forweekdaytraffic,acrossinginZone1woulddivert25,000fromtheexistingcrossing,leavingroughly61,000ADTontheexistingcrossing.TheUS50areaoutsideAnnapolis,ontheWesternShore,wouldremainseverelycongested.ThegreatesteffectontrafficvolumeswouldlikelybefromlandusechangesinKentCounty.Basedonthesesketchleveltrafficprojections,acrossinginZone1couldrequiremajorupgradestoMD702,MD43,NorthPointRoad,theapproachesalongI-695(BaltimoreBeltway),andanewroadorupgradestoexistingroadsfromTolchestertoUS301(approximately18-20miles).
Zone � — ForZone2,thelocationoftheexistingBayBridge,morelaneswouldbeneededadjacenttothebridgetomeetthecapacityoftheapproachroads.IncreasedcapacitywouldalsobenecessaryonUS50approachingAnnapolis.WideningtheUS50approachthroughAnnapoliswouldlikelyexacerbatecapacityissuesonI-97.OntheEasternShore,anupgradeofUS50fromtheUS301splittoMD404wouldbenecessary.TheroadwaysegmentofUS50betweentheBridgetoUS301wouldreachcapacityaround2030.
Zone � — Forsummertraffic,acrossinginZone3potentiallycoulddivertapproximately50,000(ADT)fromtheexistingcrossingandtheexistingcrossingcouldstillcarryapproximately85,000(ADT),whichslightlyexceedsitscapacity.Forweekdaytraffic,acrossinginZone3coulddivertapproximately25,000fromtheexistingcrossingwithroughly61,000ADTstillusingtheexistingcrossing.TheUS50areaoutsideAnnapolis,ontheWesternShore,wouldremainseverelycongested.AcrossinginZone3couldnecessitatewideningofMD4toeightlanesfromI-495toMD260(14miles).AmajorupgradetoMD260oranewroadway(8.5miles)alsocouldbeneeded.InTalbotCounty,anewlimitedaccessfreewaycouldbeneededfromKnappsNarrows,oversensitiveareas,totieintoUS50nearEaston(18miles).Thisnew
roadwaywouldrequireasignificantnumberofbridgesacrossriversandwetlandsystems.
Zone � — Forsummertraffic,acrossinginZone4coulddivertapproximately25,000(ADT)fromtheexistingcrossing,leavingtheexistingcrossingtostillcarryabout110,000(ADT),whichexceedsitscapacity.Onanon-summerweekday,acrossinginZone4coulddivertapproximately15,000(ADT)fromtheexistingcrossing,leavingroughly71,000ADTontheexistingcrossing.Forbothtypesoftraffic,majorcapacityissueswouldremainontheexistingbridge.US50outsideAnnapoliswouldremainseverelycongested.Inaddition,inCalvertCounty,MD4wouldneedtobeupgradedwithonetotwoadditionallanesineachdirectionwithgreatercontrolsofaccessfromI-495toPrinceFrederick(32miles).AnaccesscontrolledfreewaycouldbeneededaroundPrinceFrederick.InDorchesterCounty,anupgradetoMD16orconstructionofanewroadwaymaybenecessary.Thisupgradeornewconstructionwouldimpactsmallcommunitiesandroughly20milesofsensitiveenvironmentalareas(alongandnearMD16).Because85percentofDorchesterCountyiscoveredbywetlands,thelengthofroadwaybridgescouldbegreaterthantheBaycrossingitself.
Roadwaycosts,dependinguponthelocationoftheproject,couldapproach$100millionpermileinurbanareasand$30-50millioninruralareas(2005dollars).Crossingwetlandswouldincurgreatercosts.ThemajorityofthecommentsofferedbytheTaskForceattheendofMeeting#2wererelatedtothecostsandimpactsofconstructinganewcrossinganditsapproachroadways.
ThepurposeofthismeetingwastointroducetheNationalEnvironmentalPolicyActof1969(NEPA)andassociatedlawsandprocesses,whichgovern
Summary of Task Force Meetings
Meeting # � – The Environmental Review and Regulatory Process
1� 1�Task Force Report1� 1�Task Force Report
theenvironmentalreviewofallfederallyfundedtransportationprojects.Inaddition,stafffromMarylandenvironmentalagenciespresentedanoverviewoftheregulatoryprocessandtheenvironmentalresourceswithineachzonewhichmaybeprotectedbystateandfederalregulations.
AlanStraus,theprojectmanagerfortheconsultantteam,reviewedthefundamentaltenetsofNEPA,whichcomprisetheenviron-mentalreviewprocess.Theenvironmentalreviewprocessisguidedbybothproceduralandsubstantivestatutes,regulations,andguidance.Thisprocessincludesmorethantwodozenfederalandstatelaws,eachfocusedonprotectionofhuman,culturalandnaturalenvironmentalresources.
NEPAisaconsensusbuildingprocess(asshowninfigure4)whereinputfromallstakeholdersisusedtodevelopaprojectthatrespondstotransportationneedsandincludesathoroughevaluationofallenvironmentalimpactsandreasonablealternatives.Atspecificpointsintheprocess,regulatoryagenciesmustconcurthatNEPArequirementshavebeenmet.Inaddition,publicinvolvementisanimportantrequirementofNEPAstudies.EachmajorstepofNEPAhasanopportunityforpublicinteractionandcomment.TheTaskForceprocessisnotpartofNEPA,butresultsfromtheTaskForcewouldbeconsideredinanyfutureNEPAprocess.
TheNEPAprocessincludesthreestages:projectscoping,detailedstudies,anddecision-making.Duringprojectscoping,thePurposeandNeedstatement,whichjustifiesanddefinesthereasonfortheproject,isdeveloped.Theprojectstudyareaisalsodefinedandinventoriesofthenatural,human,andculturalenvironmentsarecollected.Duringthistime,traveldemandstudiesareconductedfortheexistingandfutureno-buildconditions.Also,theleadfederalandstateagencieswillsolicitinputfromthepubliconthePurposeandNeedstatementandonpotentialsolutions.Throughouttheprocess,no-buildisalwaysanoptionandisalsousedtocomparethebenefitsandimpactsofalternativesolutions.
Summary of Task Force Meetings
Decision Point
Decision Point
Project Implementation
•Design
•Right-of-Way
•Construction
APPr
ox
imA
tely 7–10 y
eAr
s
NEPA
•PurposeandNeed
•AlternativesScopingandScreening
•DetailedEnvironmentalInventories
•NaturalResources
•Socio-economicFeatures
•CulturalResources
•PublicInvolvement
•DraftEnvironmentalImpactStudies
•EnvironmentalDocumentation
•Local,State,andFederalInteragencyCoordination
•RegulatoryPermitsandApprovals
APPr
ox
imA
tely 4–7 y
eAr
s
Task Force Process
•Sketch-levelTravelDemandModeling
•EnviromentalInventories
•CrossingTypes
•UnderstandingGrowthandEconomicDevelopment
•PublicInvolvement
•ReportofTaskForceFindings
1 yeA
r
Figure 4: NEPA Consensus Building Process
1� 1�Task Force Report1� 1�Task Force Report
OncealternativesaredefinedthatcouldmeetthePurposeandNeed,detailedstudiesofengineering,traffic,andtheenvironment(naturalandhuman)areconductedtoevaluatethebenefits,impacts,andcostsofthealternatives.Environmentalstudiesincludewetlands,waterwaysandfloodplains,sensitivespeciesandhabitats,forestsandparklands,historicandarchaeologicalresources,neighborhoods,andcommunityfeatures.Thedetailedstudiesalsoevaluatelanduse,growthanddevelopment,traveldemandandcapacity,andairandnoiseimpacts.Theresultsofthesestudiesarepresentedtothepublicandagenciesinadraftenvironmentaldocument.Forlargecomplexprojects,thisdocumentiscalledaDraftEnvironmentalImpactStatement(DEIS).Duringthisstage,thepublichasanopportunitytoreviewandcommentonthedocument,bothataLocation/DesignPublicHearingandinwritingduringthecommentperiod.
Duringthedecision-makingstage,theleadagenciesreviewallcommentsontheDEIS,performadditionalstudiesandrefinealternatives,andrecommendaPreferredAlternative.TheFinalEnvironmentalImpactStatement(FEIS)documentsthesupportforthePreferredAlternativeandhowpubliccommentswereconsidered.ThepublicthenhasanopportunitytocommentontheFEIS.OnceFEIScommentsarereviewedandconsideredbytheleadagencies,aRecordofDecision(ROD)isissuedbytheleadfederalagency.Ifabuildalternativeisselected,thepreliminarydesigncomponentsofthepreferredaction,asdocumentedintheFEIS,areusedtoobtainthepermitsandregulatoryapprovalsnecessarytoconstructaproject.
ItiscriticalthatpublicstakeholdersareinvolvedduringeverystageofNEPA.Throughitshistoryofplanningandimplementingprojects,Marylandhasdevelopedagoodrecordofprotectingtheenvironmentandaddressingcommunities’concerns.
ThelawsthatguidetheNEPAprocessareadministeredby17federaland12stateagencies.Asanationalleader,Marylandusesaprocessthatcombinestheenvironmental
reviewprocesswiththeregulatoryprocessinanefforttostreamlinethetwoprocessesandmakethemmoreefficient.Theselawsinclude:
Federal Laws: •NationalEnvironmentalPolicyAct •Section401,402and404oftheClean
WaterAct •Section9ofRiversandHarborsAct •Section10ofRiversandHarborsAct •Section4(f)oftheU.S.Departmentof
TransportationAct •Section106oftheHistoricPreservationAct •Section6(f)oftheLandandWater
ConservationAct •Section307oftheCoastalZone
ManagementAct •Section7oftheEndangeredSpeciesAct •FishandWildlifeCoordinationAct •MigratoryBirdTreatyAct •NationalWildlifeRefugeSystem
ImprovementAct •WildandScenicRiversAct •MarineProtection,Researchand
SanctuariesAct •CleanAirAct •ResourceConservationandRecoveryAct •GeneralBridgeAct
State Laws •EnvironmentArticle •WaterwayConstructionandDam
SafetyAct •NontidalWetlandsProtectionAct •TidalWetlandsAct •SedimentControlAct •StormwaterManagementAct •AmbientAirQualityControlAct •NaturalResourcesArticle •MarylandEnvironmentalPolicyAct •ChesapeakeandAtlanticCoastalBays •CriticalAreaProtectionAct •Non-gameandEndangeredSpeciesAct •ForestConservationAct •ScenicandWildRiversAct •HousingandCommunityDevelopment
Article •MarylandHistoricalPreservationAct
Summary of Task Force Meetings
1� 1�Task Force Report1� 1�Task Force Report
Summary of Task Force MeetingsGarySetzer,DirectorofWetlandsandWaterwaysfortheMarylandDepartmentoftheEnvironment,presentedadditionaldetailaboutMaryland’sregulatoryprocessandhighlightedsomeofthefederalapprovalstypicallyneededfortransportationprojects.Inaddition,RenSerey,ExecutiveDirector,CriticalAreaCommission,ChesapeakeandAtlanticCoastalBaysCriticalAreaCommission,highlightedregulationsthatprotectforestbuffersandlandsadjacenttotheBay,suchastheForestConservationActandtheChesapeakeandAtlanticCoastalBaysCriticalAreaAct.
KennethMiller,DirectorofWatershedInformationServicesfortheMarylandDepartmentofNaturalResources,presentedresourcesandpotentialenvironmentalissuesforthoseresourcesineachzone.Allfourzonescontainsignificantnatural,human,andculturalresourcesthatwouldbeconsideredinanyfuturestudies.However,whileeachzonehasauniquesetoffeatures,therearesimilarconditionsbetweenzones.Eachprojectwouldhaveimpactsthatextendbeyondzoneboundariesknownassecondaryandcumulativeimpacts.Secondaryandcumulativeimpactscanresultfromthegrowthpressuresthatoccurwhennewcapacityismadeavailableandmaybegreaterthanthedirect,orlocal,impacts.
A summary of the major features in each zone:
Zone 1 — Zone1containsanabundanceofagriculturaleasementsandrurallegacyareas,somesensitiveresourceareas(habitatswherethreatenedandendangeredspeciesexist),wetland,floodplainsandseagrasses(submergedaquaticvegetation)aswellasparklands,communitiesandneighborhoods.Theproximityofafederalfacility,AberdeenProvingGrounds,tothiszonewouldalsobeaconsideration.OtherfeaturesofinterestinZone1includeCarrollIsland;GunpowderFalls;NorthPoint;Hart-Miller/PleasureIsland;RockyPointStatePark;MartinStateAirport;numerouscommunities,includingEssex,Dundalk,MiddleRiver,Chase,Chestertown,RockHall,andChurchHill;Patapsco,Back,andMiddleRivers;ChesterRiveranditscreeksand
tributaries;andChestertownandQuakerNeckLandinghistoricdistricts.
Zone � — WithinZone2,communitiesandneighborhoods,wetlands,seagrassesandfloodplains,parklands,sensitiveresourceareas,historicresourcesandprotectedlands(agriculturaleasements)exist.MuchoftheuniqueresourcefeaturesarefoundontheEasternShore.SomeofthespecificresourcesincludeSandyPointStatePark;theU.S.NavalAcademy,theSevern,Magothy,andSouthRiversandtheircreeksandtributaries;historicareas,includingAnnapolis,Stevensville,andCentreville;Stevensville,KentIsland,Centrevilleandothercommunities;EasternNeckIslandNationalWildlifeRefuge;WildfowlTrustofNorthAmerica–ChesapeakeBayEnvironmentalCenter;andtheChesterandWyeRiversandtheircreeksandtributaries.
Zone � — Zone3containshistoricresources;SensitiveResourceAreas;protectedlands,especiallyinsouthAnneArundelCounty;wetlands;floodplainsandseagrasses,especiallyontheEasternShorepeninsulassouthofSt.Michaels;andcommunities,neighborhoods,andtouristlocations,suchasDeale,NorthBeachandChesapeakeBeach.Inaddition,thecommunitiesofSt.Michaels(historicdistrict),TilghmanIsland,andEaston(historicdistrict),aswellasthehistoricareasnorthofChesapeakeBeacharelocatedinZone3.OtherfeaturesincludetheMiles,AvonandChoptankRiversandtheircreeksandtributaries;andtheHarrisandBroadCreeksandinlets.
Zone � — Zone4containsextensivewetlandsystems,includingthosedesignatedasWetlandsofSpecialStateConcern.MuchofthesensitiveenvironmentispartoftheBlackwaterNationalWildlifeRefuge,whichmakesupalargeportionofDorchesterCounty.Zone4alsocontainsfloodplainsandseagrasses,sensitiveresourceareas,parklands,communitiesandneighborhoodsandagriculturaleasements.MajorfeaturesofZone4includeCalvertCliffsNuclearPowerPlantandDominionCovePointLiquidNaturalGasterminal;CalvertCliffsandGreenwellStateParks;thecommunitiesinandaroundCambridge(includinghistoricalongMD16),PrinceFrederick,andChesapeakeBeach;
1� 1�Task Force Report1� 1�Task Force Report
theSmartGrowthgoalsandthemostrecentPriorityPlacesinitiative.WhiletheStateprovidesoverallguidanceforgrowthpolicies,itisthelocalgovernmentsthatdetermineappropriatelanduseandzoning.EverycomprehensiveplanpreparedbymunicipalandcountyjurisdictionsinMarylandmustincludetheseeightvisions:
1.Developmentisconcentratedinsuitableareas
2.Sensitiveareasareprotected
3.Inruralareas,growthisdirectedtoexistingpopulationcentersandresourceareasareprotected
4.StewardshipoftheChesapeakeBayandlandisauniversalethic
5.Conservationofresourcesispracticed
6.Economicgrowthisencouragedandregulatorymechanismsareaddressedtoachievethesevisions
7.Adequatepublicfacilitiesandinfrastructureareavailableorplannedinareaswheregrowthistooccur(2000Session)
8.Fundingmechanismsareaddressedtoachievethesevisions
Buildinguponitseightvisions,Marylandimplementedtwoadditionalpiecesoflegis-lationtopromotegrowthanddevelopmentinthemostsuitableareas.SmartGrowthlegislationfrom1997identifiesPriorityFundingAreas(PFA)andchannelspublicinvestmenttotheseareas.Thisconcentratesgrowthwhereinfrastructure,suchaswaterandsewerlines,schoolsandadequateroadways,alreadyexistsandprotectsnaturalenvironmentalresourceareasatthesametime.
Countiesandmunicipalitiesplanfuturelandusesbydesignatingspecificzoningtoregulatethedensityandtypeofdevelopmentinspecificareas.Theinterdependentrelationshipbetweenlanduseandtransportation
thePatuxentRiveranditscreeksandtributaries;TaylorsIslandWildlifeManagementArea;historicareasaroundPrinceFrederickandwestofCalvertCliffs;andtheLittleChoptankandHongaRiversandtheircreeksandtributaries.
ThesepresentationsgeneratedalivelydiscussionofhowalternativeswouldbedevelopedandhowzonesmaybeselectedforfurtherstudyaspartoftheNEPAprocess.Manycommentsfocusedontheconsiderationofothermodesoftravel,suchastransit,insteadofanewhighwaybridge.Inaddition,theTaskForceinquiredaboutArticle25oftheMarylandCode,CountyCommissioners/MiscellaneousProvisions/§236,ConstructionofTollFacilities.ThisMarylandlawstatesthat(a)AStateagency,includingtheMarylandTransportationAuthority,maynotconstructanytollroad,tollhighway,ortollbridgeinthecountiesenumeratedinthissectionwithouttheexpressconsentofamajorityofthegovernmentsoftheaffectedcounties.(b)ThissectionappliestoCarolineCounty,CecilCounty,DorchesterCounty,KentCounty,QueenAnne’sCounty,SomersetCounty,TalbotCounty,WicomicoCounty,andWorcesterCounty.Acopyofthislaw,whichwouldalsobeconsideredattheappropriatetimeinthefuture,wasprovidedtotheTaskForce.
ThepurposeofthismeetingwastoprovideinformationaboutgrowthandeconomicdevelopmentintheWesternandEasternShorecountiesandhowtheseactivitiesrelatetoeachotherandtotheneedforcapacityacrosstheBay.JimNoonan,DirectorofInfrastructurePlanningfortheMarylandDepartmentofPlanning(MDP),firstexplainedtherelationshipbetweenMDP’schargeandthelocalandcountycomprehensiveplanningprocesses.MDPisthestateagencyresponsibleforcoordinatingstatewideplanninginitiatives,includingthevisionsandgoalsofthe1992PlanningAct,
Summary of Task Force Meetings
Meeting # � - Growth and Economic Development
1� 1�Task Force Report1� 1�Task Force Report
infrastructuremakesthetimingofinfrastructureimprovementscritical–ideally,countyrequirements,suchasAdequatePublicFacilityOrdinances,wheredeveloperspayforlocaltransportationimprovementsnecessarytoaccommodatenewdevelopment,controlthepaceofdevelopmentsothatthedemandforinfrastructuredoesnotoutpacetheavailabilityoflocalandStatefunding.TheStateConsolidatedTransportationProgramandlocalCapitalImprovementProgramsdictatethepaceofinfrastructureinvestmentsthatsupportdevelopment.Whilelocalgovernmentsareresponsibleforprovidingtheinfrastructuretosupportwhatisinthecomprehensiveplan,
Summary of Task Force MeetingstheStatespendsitsinfrastructureinvestmentsonwhatlocalgovernmentsdesignateastheirhighestpriorities.
WhileMaryland’sbirthanddeathratesbalanceout(nonetpopulationgain),immigrationandmigrationfromotherstatesandnationsisstrong.Maryland’seconomyremainsvibrant,withamplejobopportunities,evenwhenthenationaleconomygrowsataslowerpace.Housingaffordability,goodschools,qualityoflifeamenities,andproximitytoculturalcentersmakeMarylandattractivetonewbusinessesandnewresidents.Thedemandforsecondhomesandretirementhomesdrivesthehousingmarket
Transportation Influences Land Use
Land Use Influences Transportation
1� 1�Task Force Report1� 1�Task Force Report
IntheBaltimoreandWashingtonregions,therateofgrowth,whichhastraditionallyincreased,willdeclineoverthenext30years.Inthepast30years,thefastestgrowthhasoccurredinSouthernMarylandandthisrapidgrowthwillcontinueoverthenextthirtyyears.Figure6showsthechangeingrowthbetween1970and2000andprojectedgrowthfor2030intheEasternShoreCounties.Overthenext30years,agrowthspikeisexpectedtooccurontheEasternShoreduetotheavailabilityofaffordablerealestate.Forexample,18,500housingunitswereaddedtoEasternShorecountiesbetween1970and2000.Overthenext30years,however,27,000unitswillbeadded,anincreaseof150percentovertheprecedingtimeperiod.
UnlikeotherEasternShorecounties,KentCountyanticipatesevengrowthoverthenext30years.TheCountyexpectsthat2,900unitswillbeaddedwithinthistimeframe,anincreaseof31percent(theCountyhasinfrastructuretosupportcreationof5,000units).Muchoftheresidentialgrowthwillbesecondhomesandretirementhousing,andwillbeconcentratednearexistingpopulationcentersandalongtheshorelines.SomeofthedemandforhousingcomesfromDelawareemploymentcenters.HousingontheEasternShoreisaffordablewhencomparedtootherpartsoftheregion.AvailabilityofhousinginKentCountydoescontributetocommutingpatternsacrosstheBayBridge.
Summary of Task Force MeetingsontheEasternShore.Thestrongdemandforhousingistemperedbyconstraintssuchastheavailabilityofwaterandsewerservice,limitsonnutrientinputstostreamsandwatersheds(federalregulation,NPDES),surfacewaterandgroundwatersupplies,adequateschoolfacilities,
andnecessarycommunityservices.Ingeneral,residentialgrowthintheWesternShorecountieshasnotinfluencedthetrafficontheBayBridgeasmuchasgrowthinEasternShorecounties.ThehouseholdgrowthtrendsforMarylandcountiesareshowninFigure5.
WorcesterWicomicoDorchesterTalbotCarolineQueenAnne’s
KentCecil
80,000
70,000
60,000
50,000
40,000
30,000
20,000
10,000
0
Tota
lHo
usi
ng
Un
its
1970 2000 2030
Figure 5: Household Growth Trends–1970-2030
1� 1�Task Force Report1� 1�Task Force Report
Summary of Task Force Meetings
1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2030
30,000
25,000
20,000
15,000
10,000
5,000
0
Tota
lHo
usi
ng
Un
its
KentCounty
QueenAnne’sCounty
CarolineCounty
TalbotCounty
DorchesterCounty
Figure 6: Residential Growth Trends–Eastern Shore
QueenAnne’sCountyanticipatessignificantgrowthduringthenextthirtyyears.NewdevelopmentintheCountyislargelydrivenbytheeasycommutetotheWesternShore.AdditionaldemandcomesfromDoverareacommutersandfromsecondandretirementhomeowners.TheCountyexpectsthat9,500unitswillbeaddedby2030,anincreaseof56percent.BecausethecurrentComprehensivePlanforQueenAnne’sCountyonlyplansforthecreationof6,700units(basedoninfrastructurecapacityandavailablelandindesignatedgrowthareas),theshortfallwillcreatepressuretoannexlandsadjacenttoexistingpopulationcenters.QueenstownandCentrevillehaveproposalsforannexations.
CarolineCountyanticipatessignificantgrowthduringthenextthirtyyears.ThoughCarolineCountyisfartherfromtheBayBridge,itshowsgrowthtrendssimilartoQueenAnne’sandTalbotCounties.Affordablehousing,as
comparedtotheWesternShore,drivesexistingandfuturedemandforhousinginCarolineCounty.Somedemandstemsfromretirementandsecondhomepurchases.TheCountyexpectsthat8,500unitswillbeneededby2030,anincreaseof71percent.Becausethecurrentcomprehensiveplansshowacapacityforonly3,600units(basedoninfrastructurecapacityandavailablelandindesignatedgrowthareas),theshortfallwillcreatepressuretoannexlandsadjacenttoexistingpopulationcenters.ThecityofDentonisconsideringannexations.AnewsewersystemisbeingplannedinGoldsborotosupportanticipatedgrowth.
TalbotCountyanticipatesevengrowthduringthenextthirtyyears.PlannedgrowthareasinEastonandTrappeprovideaffordablehousingforthegrowingworkforce.MuchofthisworkforcecommutestotheWesternShore.TheCountyexpectsthat5,000unitswillbeneededby2030,anincreaseof30percent.
�0 �1Task Force Report�0 �1Task Force Report
ThisgrowthwillputadditionalpressureonexistinghighwayinfrastructureincludingtheBayBridge.Locallanduseplansanddecisionsinfluencetheneedfortransportationfacilitiesthatservetheregion,suchastheBayBridge.CurrentcomprehensiveplansweredesignedinthecontextoftheexistingroadwayinfrastructureanddonotconsiderthepossibilityofadditionalcapacityacrosstheChesapeakeBay.Atthistime,noneofthelocalplanningdocumentsidentifyaneedordesireforadditionalcapacity.
AttheconclusionofMr.Noonan’spresentationongrowth,TaskForcememberscommentedontheneedtoreassessgrowthprojectionsifmunicipalannexationsbecomeacommonorfrequentresponsetogrowthpressures.Annexationwouldallowmuchhigherdensitiesandcouldinvalidatethecurrenthousingprojectionssignificantly.
Next,JimRzepkowski,AssistantSecretaryfortheMarylandDepartmentofBusinessandEconomicDevelopment,presentedinformationoneconomicdevelopmentinMarylandandspecificallyontheEasternShore.Hediscussedcurrenteconomictrends(i.e.,medianincome,unemploymentrates,etc.),therelationshipbetweeneconomicdevelopmentandtransportationinfrastructure,andtheconstraintsandpossibilitiesforeconomicdevelopmentontheEasternShore.Maryland’seconomyisoneofthestrongestinthecountry.Marylandhasthesecondhighestmedianhouseholdincomeinthenationat$57,588.In2004,Maryland’sunemploymentratewas4.2percent(10thlowestinthecountry).Maryland’seconomicstrengthstemsinpartfromitslocationalongtheI-95Corridor.Manyfederalfacilitiesandmilitaryinstallations,privateandpublicresearchcenters,suchastheNationalInstitutesofHealth,JohnsHopkinsandtheUniversityofMaryland,areincloseproximitytoBWIAirportandthePortofBaltimore.Marylandalsohasathrivingbiotechcorridor(I-270)inMontgomeryCounty.
WesternShoreeconomieshaveshiftedtoknowledge-basedandservice-orientedeconomiesthatofferhigherwagejobsthan
Municipalgrowthmanagementtoolscreatedacapacityfor12,600additionalhousingunits.However,thisgrowthmayputstressonotherinfrastructure,particularlytransportation.Growthoutsidemunicipalitiesisdrivenbythemarketsforretirementandsecondhomes.
DorchesterCountyanticipatesevengrowthduringthenextthirtyyears.DorchesterCountyisperceivedasanideallocationbecauseitisonlyanhour’sdrivefromtheBaltimore-WashingtonAirport,employmentcentersandtheculturalamenitiesoftheBaltimore-Washingtonarea.Muchofthehousingdemandstemsfromitsproximitytotheseareas.Therelativeaffordabilityofhousing,ascomparedtotheWesternShore,makesDorchesterCountyattractivetocommuters.TheCountyexpectsthat6,000unitswillbeneededby2030,anincreaseof30percent.ThecurrentComprehensivePlanshowsacapacityfor26,100units.Waterandsewerinfrastructureisnotyetinplacetoaccommodateplannedgrowth.ThedemandforhousingintheremainderoftheCountyisprimarilydrivenbytheretirementandthesecondhomemarketandrealestateinvestment.
Insummary,thedemographicspresentedtotheTaskForcewerebasedonwhatiscontainedinlocallanduseplansdraftedbytheEasternShorecounties.Thetimingandneedfortransportationinfrastructureisdependentuponlocallandusepolicies.TheabundanceofaffordablehousingopportunitiesontheEasternShoreisasignificantcontributortocommutertrafficontheBayBridge.ThenumberofhouseholdsinmanyEasternShorecountiesisprojectedtoincreasefasterthanhistoricalgrowthrates.Stateofficialsresponsibleforthehighwaysystemthatservestheseareas,areconcernedabouttheamountofinfrastructurenecessarytosupportprojectedgrowthduringthenextthirtyyears,evenwithoutadditionalcapacityacrosstheBay.ThedemandforjobsandscarcityofhousinginDelawarealsowillhaveanimpactonnearbyMarylandcounties.NewjobgrowthontheEasternShorecouldprovideabalancingeffectbut,ifthenext10yearsmirrorthelast,themajorityofgrowthwillbecommuterrelated.
Summary of Task Force Meetings
�0 �1Task Force Report�0 �1Task Force Report
thoseinotherareasofMaryland,suchasWesternMaryland,BaltimoreCityandtheEasternShore,whichhavenotexperiencedthesamerateofgrowth.TraditionalindustriesliketheMarylandwaterman,theseafoodindustryandmanufacturingaredecliningontheEasternShore.Agriculturallandisbeingsoldfornewhousingdevelopments.
EasternShorecountieswiththeeasiestaccesstoemploymentcentersontheWesternShore(QueenAnne’sandCecilCounties)havethehighestmedianincome.ResidentsandbusinessesinthesecountiesdependonaccesstotheWesternShore.Nearly42percentofcommuterstotheWesternShorecomefromQueenAnne’sCountyandroughly15percentcomefromCecilCounty(thoughCecilCountyresidentsmostlikelyuseI-95andUS40.)EmploymentcentersontheWesternShoreincludetheAberdeenProvingGrounds/EdgewoodArsenal,JohnsHopkins,ISGSteel,theSocialSecurityAdministration,ConstellationEnergy,UniversityofMarylandMedicalCenter,thePortofBaltimore,BWIAirport,FortMeadeandtheNationalSecurityAdministration,federalfacilitiesintheDistrictofColumbiaandtheI-270BiotechCorridor.RecentBaseRealignmentandClosure(BRAC)planswillresultinadditionalemploymentontheWesternShore,whichwilldrawfromtheworkforcelivingontheEasternShore.FortMeadeanticipates10,000to15,000newjobsandAberdeenanticipates5,000newjobsoverthenextseveralyears.AsmallpercentageofWesternShoreresidentscommutetojobsontheEasternShore.Someofthisdemandisdrivenbythehousingconstructionandservice-basedindustriesontheEasternShore.
Economicdevelopmentopportunitiesarefosteredbyaffordablebroadbandaccess,availablelandforindustrialsitesandcommercialbuildings,waterandsewerserviceavailabilityandsufficienttransportationinfrastructure.EconomicdevelopmentontheEasternShoreislimitedbythelackofaffordablebroadbandaccess,althoughfundingisnowinplacetohelpprovidebroadbandaccess.Newindustrialandtechnologyparks
arebeingplannedinallofthecountiesontheEasternShore.
LargescalebusinessesmayconsidertheavailableworkforceontheEasternShoretobetoosmallfortheirneeds.Regardlessofrecenthighwayimprovements,companiesareconcernedaboutalackofhighwayaccessibilitytodelivertheirproductstomarketsontheWesternShore.Forexample,duringthere-deckingoftheeastboundspanoftheBayBridge,theAuthoritylimitedtrucktraffictoeasecongestionforcommuters.MembersofthebusinessandtransportindustrieswereveryvocalabouttheirdependenceonareliableBayCrossing.
TheLowerEasternShore(Somerset,WicomicoandWorcesterCounties)hasplanstodiversifyitseconomicbaseandexpandknowledge-basedbusinesses.ThisregionalsoplanstomaintainandlengthenthetourismseasonandexpanditsTourismandHospitalityindustry.Theregionisplanningforanincubatorfacility(relatingtoagricultureoraerospace)linkedtotheUniversityofMarylandEasternShore(UMES).Theregionanticipateseconomicgrowthinaerospace,distribution,marineindustry,agricultureandmanufacturing.
TheMid-Shore(Caroline,DorchesterandTalbotCounties)hasplanstoretain,createandrecruitinnovativecompaniesthatpayhigherthanaveragewages.Thisregionwillemphasizesupportingsmalllocalstartupcompaniesandentrepreneurs.TheMid-ShoreisdevelopingabrandingstrategytoattractregionalmarketsandexpandHeritageTourism.
TheUpperShore(Cecil,Kent,andQueenAnne’sCounties)emphasizesinfrastructure,affordablehousing,tourism,sustainableagricultureandcreatingemploymentopportunitiesforlocalresidentswhocommutetotheWesternShore.TheBaltimoreMetropolitanRegion(AnneArundel,Baltimore,Carroll,HarfordandHowardCountiesandthecitiesofBaltimoreandAnnapolis)willcontinuedevelopmentoftechnologyindustry,specificallytheareasofhomelanddefense,andresearchand
Summary of Task Force Meetings
�� ��Task Force Report�� ��Task Force Report
developmentandwillcreatehigh-endjobsandhigh-valuemanufacturingjobs.Theregionexpectstoretainandexpandexistingbusinessesandattractnewbusinesses.Theregionwillexpanditstaxbasethroughnewrealestatedevelopmentopportunities.TheBayBridgeisnotcentraltoeconomicprioritiesbecauseI-95isthisregion’stransportationcorridor.
SouthernMaryland(Calvert,CharlesandSt.Mary’sCounties)hasoneofthelowestunemploymentratesintheState(lessthan3percent).Theregionwillretainandexpandagricultureandrelatedbusinesses.Theregioncontinuestomarketitselfasgoodplacetolive,workanddobusiness.SouthernMarylandisdevelopingaregionalplanformanagingitswaterresourcesandplanningforexistingandprojectedcongestiononmajortransportationcorridorswithinandleadingintoSouthernMaryland.Withintheseplanningefforts,theregionisdeterminingthesustainablegroundwateryieldforsustainablepopulation
forSouthernMaryland.Thisregion’slowunemploymentratemeansanewcrossingwouldlikelydrawfromtheworkforceontheEasternShore.Countieswithhigherunemploymentrates,likeDorchesterCounty,haveanavailablelaborforce.
TourismbringssignificantearningstomanycommunitiesandmunicipalitiesinMaryland.Inthepastfiftyyears,OceanCityhasbenefitedthemostfromtheconstructionoftheBayBridge.In2003,Maryland’sAtlanticbeachresortswelcomed3.5millionvisitors.Eachyearbeachvisitorsspendabout$1billion.TheperceptionisthatOceanCity,Marylandisbuiltout;however,thisisnottrue.OceanCitywillhavesignificanthousingcapacityasformerindustrialsitesandbeachfronthomesaredevelopedintocondominiums.Inadditiontoreducingtraffic,Maryland’s“GoEarly-StayLate”and“TakingtheHeatOutofSummerTravel”programshaveyieldedadditionaltourismdollars.
Insummary,somekeyeconomicindicatorsshowtheEasternShorecountieslaggingbehindBaltimore-Washingtonregion.TheWesternShorecountiesbenefitfromtheirproximitytotheI-95corridorandbroadbandaccess.ThishasenabledtheWesternShorecountiestotransitionfromagriculturaleconomiestoknowledge-basedindustries.EconomicdevelopmentintheWesternShorecountieswouldnotbeaffectedverymuchbyanewBaycrossingbecausetheeconomicenginedependsontheI-95corridor.TheBayBridgeiscriticaltotheeconomicvitalityoftheLowerEasternShorebecauseitsupportsatourismindustry(OceanCity)secondonlyBaltimoreCityintourismdollarstotheState.
Summary of Task Force Meetings