MTA's long range plan - will it be worth the paper?

“Would you tell me, please, which way I ought to go from here?” / “That depends a good deal on where you want to get to,” said the Cat. / “I don’t much care where–” said Alice. / “Then it doesn’t matter which way you go,” said the Cat. / “–so long as I get SOMEWHERE,”  (Alice in the Wonderland)

The MTA works in rapid succession on the kind of plans that map out the future, some are firsts. The MTA never had a Strategic Plan, it published its first one in in September of 2021 under the title "Rebuilding Better". The agency never prepared a statewide 50 year transit plan, but it has one in the works now. 

The latest in a series of MTA plans: A 50n year plan

Many would argue, we don't need more plans, we need better transit. Indeed, there have been plenty of plans, including the Baltimore Region Rail System Plan of 2002 which was shredded when the current Governor killed the plan's crown jewel, the Red Line in 2015. The Rail Plan's successor, the Regional Transit Plan for Central Maryland (RTP), was mandated by the legislature to have a 25 year horizon. It was published in 2020 under the title "Connecting our Future" and must be updated every 5 years.

The Central Maryland Regional Transit Plan is a plan for improving public transportation in the region over the next 25 years. The Plan presents goals, objectives, and initiatives to enhance transit service, support the economy, and reduce impacts to the environment. The Plan was developed by the Maryland Department of Transportation Maryland Transit Administration (MDOT MTA) in coordination with the Central Maryland Regional Transit Plan Commission, the five jurisdictions that compose the Central Maryland region, local transit agencies, the Baltimore Metropolitan Council, and members of the public. (RTP Executive Summary) 

Just last month the MTA introduced a Zero Emissions Bus Conversion Report , also mandated by the MD Legislature. (I wrote about it here). A number of reports are mandated in regular intervals, including the Strategic Asset Management Plan about the state of repair of everything MDOT owns. 

The Baltimore Metropolitan Council, the metro area's regional planning construct, also prepares regular transportation plans, and so does MDOT, the parent organization of the MTA which prepares every five years a 20 year Maryland Transportation Plan. In short, there is no shortage of plans that would tell Alice where to go. In spite of all that resolve towards a better future, many would still describe the regions transit system as inadequate, even after the big bus reform that the Governor had provided as a $120 million substitute for the $3 billion lost Red Line. In fact, poor performance can now be seen on MTA's own transit dashboard. Covid did a number on transit performance and MTA stopped adding new data after September of last year when the bus on time performance (from 1 minute early to 7 minutes late) stood at 72.8% and Mobility Link on time performance had plummeted to 59.2%.

Seven goals adopted by the 50 year plan

So, does it make any sense for the MTA to create additionally a Maryland Statewide Transit Plan with a 50 year horizon? Does the the 109 page draft of this 50 year plan, unveiled  at the beginning of this year, say anything that the 25 year RTP doesn't? The RTP had three goals and six objectives. The 50 year plan has one vision and 7 goals. Each goal has a set of strategies and The public can weigh in on that question until February 18. 

The Plan presents both a collective vision and foundational goals for our transit system over the next 50 years in manageable 5- and 25-year timeframes. It identifies opportunities to achieve this bold vision by detailing actionable, measurable strategies, and uniting projects and investments across the state’s counties, cities, and towns. It was designed to reflect the diversity of Maryland’s landscape and unique needs across all its regions. It was accomplished with extensive outreach to and collaboration with more than 20 local and regional transit providers, partner agencies and staff, frontline transit workers, business and industry leaders, advocates, community representatives, and transit riders. (MTA Administrator Holly Arnold)

To be fair, the two plans serve different purposes. The one (the RTP) serves the core MTA service area, the other (the 50 year plan) includes transit services statewide, even though the plan remains mum on how any of it would actually be enforced at these 24 other transit providers. 

MTA's Manager of the Project Development Division, Jade Clayton presented the plan to the group Transit Choices recently.  To drive home what can happen in 50 years, the presentation included a 50 look-back all the way to 1970 when WMATA's metro system started construction and the MTA was formed from the Baltimore Transit Company.  The RTP is very focused on specific measurable metrics so that the 5 year progress reports can be evaluated by the Legislature. The 50 year plan provides fewer measurable goals and describes "what success would look like" in descriptive form.

Screenshot from the 50-Plan draft

Like it has become common for corporations, banks and many non-profits, the 50 year plan yields to the current political discourse, and puts equity front and center. That could be opportunism or an actual opportunity to set things right. (there isn't yet a term for fake equity discussions comparable to the term "greenwashing" for fake environmentalism). One should give the new generation of leaders at MTA the benefit of the doubt and also some credit. It is very likely that this plan represents a serious effort of re-calibrating transit service so it serves those best who need it the most. This was already the focus of the RTP as well. The draft 50 year plan appears to be more than an equity fig leaf, even if the methodology of determining equitable service could be further refined, in part by taking a page from the metrics of the RTP. 

Maybe the biggest difference between the 25 and 50 year plan is that the RTP avoids specific project commitments and simply identifies priority corridors for further study. (The east-west priority corridor study will be completed in a few weeks. The corridor also received a $50 million grant boost recently).

The 25 year Regional Transit Plan cover

The 50 year plan, by contrast, includes a list of  25 connections under the title "50 year vision". Those 25 items include everything that is in the RTP, but other items sound more specific. As for which projects have priority, the language in the plan is vague:

While many of these intercity and regionally significant connections will will take time to be realized, those that are expected to come online sooner are those for which planning and design studies or projects are currently underway. Several of these nearer-term efforts are informed by local Transit Development Plans that lay out goals with a five-year outlook, as well as Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) long-range transportation plans and the Regional Transit Plan for Central Maryland that have goals with a 20- to 25-year outlook. (50 year plan)

The plan includes as number of "illustrative regional projects" that are currently studied. Connections include the Western Maryland MARC study, the RTP studies, the Montgomery County "Flash Rapid Bus Transit", the Southern MD Rapid Transit Study for PG and Charles Counties, the Intercity Bus Study. The plan is richly describing current transit and Maryland's regions but is sparse on an analysis of current deficiencies, chiefly fare and service integration (one ticket and payment method for all transit systems with coordinate schedules and transfer points at transit hubs, a topic that would warrant its own goal and implementation strategy but isn't even listed among the 25 projects. 

When participants at Transit Choices asked about funding for the 50 year projects, Jade Clayton admitted that funding was not part of the study and would depend on the more short-term capital funding plans, such as the 5 year Ttransportation improvement plan (TIP). The 50 year plan includes this ominous language about money:

Achieving the vision, and goals, of the Statewide Transit Plan will require continual investment and commitment from state leaders as well as support from local and regional partners.(50 year plan).

Six objectives of the 25 yr RTP

It is clear that the 50 year time horizon begs the question whether transit should be reverted back from the State to the city or at least the region. This debate is already simmering in the background, but remains unaddressed by the 50 year plan.

Both, the 25 core area and the 50 year statewide plan are notable for being weak on climate change. Decarbonizing transport and the built environment is lamely lumped in under the title innovation and sustainability and "preparedness for the future". This is a fairly grave deficiency, given that transportation is the biggest carbon emitter in this state as well as nationally and that the MTA as well as all the other associated local transit providers have a big role to play in decrabonization and cleaner air. Not only by making buses and trains emission free but also by repositioning their entire building and vehicle inventory from yards and shops to mobility sedans and repair trucks towards a carbon free future. 

Naturally, for this there is another plan. The MTA has a Sustainability Plan as well. It dates back to 2018 and it, too is weak and without specific targets. That plan speaks about employee morale, about livable communities, transit experience, energy, water, waste, revenue, reliability and repair without committing to much of anything. This plan was signed by the previous MTA Administrator Kevin Quinn who is now at the helm of  the Vancouver transit agency TransLink. During his short time there, the British Columbia region has been hit by several severe weather events, including extreme heat and extreme snowfall. Quinn has already made combating climate change his signature activity at TransLink. A 17 pages Climate Action Strategy came hot off the presses this January. The MTA 50 year plan authors should look at that document not only on page 3 where they can admire their dapper looking old boss but also on pages 21-25 where the specific targets and implementation strategies are. 

Vancouver Translink Roadmap to Net Zero: Ambitious plan by MTA's
previous Administrator 

Given how uncertain even the next six months are, a 50 year plan seems overly ambitious. By its nature it has to be even more vague than the 25 year plan. Unfortunately, it didn't really tackle the big issues that are almost certain to define the next half century: Artificial intelligence, self driving vehicles, the change of work and the implication on transit, and climate change. 

In recognition of long-term uncertainties, the 50-year plans ends with a five year action plan with steps under each of the seven goals accompanied with an assessment for which steps the various statewide transit providers have the data to measure progress. But even this five year plan section should be fleshed out for funding, sustainability, climate change and implementation practicality.  This way it could result in truly improved service statewide that is guided by a longer perspective. 

Klaus Philipsen, FAIA

Submit comments to the MTA Plan HERE. (Deadline is 2/18/22)