St. Mary's County Transportation Development Plan

107 Pages·2007·9.9 MB·English

St. Mary’s County

Transportation Development Plan

August 2007

Office of Planning
6 St. Paul Street
Baltimore, Maryland 21202-1614
TABLE OF CONTENTS

TABLE OF CONTENTS

I. INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................1
II. EXISTING CONDITIONS................................................................................................2
ECONOMIC/DEMOGRAPHIC CHARACTERISTICS OF ST. MARY’S COUNTY..............................2
TRIP GENERATORS..............................................................................................................13
III. INVENTORY OF EXISTING TRANSPORTATION SERVICES............................17
ST. MARY'S TRANSIT SYSTEM.............................................................................................17
MTA SERVICE.....................................................................................................................33
OTHER TRANSPORTATION PROVIDERS................................................................................34
IV. NEEDS ASSESSMENT..................................................................................................36
TRANSIT PROPENSITY..........................................................................................................36
PEER SYSTEM REVIEW.........................................................................................................39
MTA PERFORMANCE STANDARDS......................................................................................41
STEERING COMMITTEE........................................................................................................41
STEERING COMMITTEE........................................................................................................41
ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ANALYSIS..................................................................................42
ST. MARY'S COLLEGE SURVEY............................................................................................50
EVALUATION OF STS SERVICE............................................................................................50
V. SERVICE IMPROVEMENT ALTERNATIVES..........................................................52
INCREMENTAL SERVICE IMPROVEMENTS.............................................................................52
RESTRUCTURE STS ROUTES................................................................................................58
RURAL DEMAND RESPONSE PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION......................................................63
AGENCY COORDINATION.....................................................................................................66
POTENTIAL LEVEL OF SERVICE INCREASES.........................................................................67
VI. FIVE YEAR IMPLEMENTATION PLAN..................................................................68
STS ROUTE IMPROVEMENTS...............................................................................................68
FARE STRUCTURE................................................................................................................78
MARKETING........................................................................................................................82
SERVICE COORDINATION.....................................................................................................82
IMPLEMENTATION PLAN......................................................................................................83
COST/REVENUE PROJECTIONS.............................................................................................85
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS....................................................................................................85
APPENDIX: STS ON-BOARD SURVEY
i
INTRODUCTION
I. INTRODUCTION

The Maryland Transit Administration (MTA) subcontracted with RLS &
Associates, Inc. to create a Transit Development Plan for St. Mary’s
County. The primary goal of this effort is to develop a plan to improve
public transportation service in St. Mary’s County. Currently, public
transportation in St. Mary’s County is primarily provided by St. Mary’s
Transportation Service (STS).

This study represents an opportunity to evaluate public transit service
options for St. Mary’s County, estimate costs, and identify potential
funding for these services. This document describes the information and
findings developed for the TDP. It includes relevant information
describing community characteristics and existing transportation services.

Several types of information have been collected. This includes 2000 U.S.
Census Bureau data at the block group level to give a broad overview of
potential demand for transit service in the study area. In addition,
countywide economic data provides a picture of the community’s
employment. This information is described in Chapter II of this report. A
description of STS and other transportation services in the St. Mary’s
County area appears in Chapter III. Chapter IV includes a needs
assessment. Chapter V includes service improvement alternatives that
were reviewed, and Chapter VI describes the final recommendations and
presents a five-year implementation plan.

All information, findings and recommendations were presented to a local
Steering Committee for review before being included in the final report.
This Committee met three times during the course of the study and
included representatives from local human service agencies, County
departments and others with a vested interest in STS services. The
following organizations participated on the Steering Committee:

♦ Board of Commissioners for St. Mary’s County
♦ Maryland Department of Transportation
♦ Patuxent River Naval Air Station
♦ Tri-County Council of Southern Maryland
♦ St. Mary’s County Department on Aging
♦ Commission on Aging
♦ St. Mary’s County Department of Social Services
♦ St. Mary’s County Department of Public Works and
Transportation
♦ The Center for Life Enrichment
♦ Pathways
♦ St. Mary’s College
1
EXISTING
CONDITIONS
II. EXISTING CONDITIONS

St. Mary’s County is geographically one of Maryland’s southern most
counties. It is bordered by Charles County to the north. It is a peninsula
with the Patuxent River and the Chesapeake Bay to the east and the
Potomac River on its southern border. The largest community in the
county is Lexington Park. The only municipality and the county seat is
Leonardtown.

Exhibit II-1 on the following page is a map of the County. State
Highways 5 and 235 are the primary highways in the county. They run in
a southeasterly direction from the Charles County line. State Highway 4
runs from Leonardtown and California across the Patuxent River into
Calvert County.
ECONOMIC/DEMOGRAPHIC CHARACTERISTICS OF ST. MARY’S COUNTY Economic/
Demographic
Population Characteristics of St.
St. Mary’s County is 361 square miles in size, and the 2005 population Mary’s County
was an estimated 96,518. The map in Exhibit II-2 shows the population
density for each block group within the County. The block groups with
the highest population density are located in Lexington Park and Golden
Beach in the northern end of the County. The California and Hollywood
areas have block groups with moderately high population density. The
remainder of the County is a mix of smaller communities and rural areas.

Leonardtown is the only incorporated municipality in St. Mary’s County.
Its population in 2000 was 1,896 persons. St. Mary’s County has two
urban areas designated by the 2000 U.S. Census. Exhibit II-3 shows the
two “urban clusters” in the County. The Golden Beach urban area
includes the Golden Beach community and portions of Charlotte Hall.
The Lexington Park urban cluster includes the communities of Lexington
Park, California, Hollywood, and part of the Patuxent River Naval Air
Station.

Population Trend
Exhibit II-4 illustrates the population of St. Mary’s County from 1970
through 2005. The county’s population grew by about twenty-six (26)
percent in each decade from 1970 to 1990. Growth slowed in the 1990’s
when there was a thirteen (13) percent increase. A higher rate of growth
resumed between 2000 and 2005, when the County’s population grew by
an estimated twelve (12) percent.
2
(cid:11) (cid:7)
(cid:7) (cid:1)
# (cid:2)
(cid:5) (cid:21)
(cid:0) (cid:11)(cid:14)
(cid:7)
(cid:14)
" (cid:9)
! (cid:11) ’
(cid:6) (cid:7)(cid:29)
(cid:27)(cid:1) #(cid:5)
(cid:14)(cid:25)(cid:25)(cid:26)(cid:31)(cid:14)(cid:28) (cid:0)(cid:5)&(cid:9)(cid:2)
(cid:24)(cid:3)(cid:11)(cid:30)(cid:11) !"(cid:14)%(cid:9)
(cid:14)
(cid:13)(cid:3)(cid:5)(cid:4) (cid:6)(cid:7)(cid:14)
(cid:23)(cid:19)(cid:29)(cid:14) (cid:28)(cid:1)(cid:3)(cid:5)
(cid:1) (cid:11)
(cid:28) (cid:14)(cid:1)
(cid:14) (cid:30)(cid:11)(cid:31)(cid:6)(cid:11)
(cid:7) (cid:5)
(cid:5) (cid:29)
(cid:3) "
(cid:11) (cid:7)
(cid:1)
(cid:18) (cid:1)
(cid:5) (cid:6)
(cid:8) $
(cid:22)
(cid:6)
(cid:1)
(cid:21)
(cid:7)(cid:14)
(cid:5)
(cid:11)
(cid:20)
(cid:1) (cid:7)
(cid:7)(cid:3) (cid:19)(cid:3)
(cid:5)(cid:6) (cid:8)(cid:9)
(cid:4)
(cid:1)(cid:2)(cid:3) (cid:8)(cid:16)
(cid:0) (cid:15)
(cid:14)
(cid:6)(cid:13)(cid:3)
(cid:12)
(cid:10)(cid:11)
(cid:8)(cid:9)
(cid:7)
(cid:6)
(cid:12)(cid:7) (cid:5)(cid:6)
(cid:5) (cid:4)(cid:3)
(cid:17)(cid:9)(cid:1)(cid:18)(cid:13) (cid:7)(cid:1)(cid:6)(cid:10)(cid:11) (cid:0)(cid:1)(cid:2)(cid:3)
(cid:7)(cid:14) (cid:9)(cid:5)
(cid:9) (cid:8)
(cid:10)
(cid:5)(cid:2)
(cid:16)
(cid:1)(cid:2)(cid:2)
(cid:15)
(cid:9)(cid:14)
(cid:11)
(cid:11)
(cid:5)
(cid:6)(cid:2)
(cid:1)
(cid:13)
(cid:0) (cid:4)
(cid:7)
(cid:11)
(cid:4)(cid:10)
(cid:8)(cid:9)
(cid:6)(cid:8)(cid:5)
(cid:10)(cid:7)
(cid:15)(cid:6)
(cid:14)(cid:5)(cid:4)(cid:5)
(cid:10)(cid:3)
(cid:6)(cid:13)(cid:2)(cid:1)
(cid:12)(cid:0)(cid:1)
(cid:17)
(cid:16)
(cid:15)
(cid:14)
(cid:10)
(cid:6)
(cid:5)
(cid:16)
(cid:18)
(cid:20) (cid:20)(cid:29)
(cid:5) (cid:5)
(cid:3) (cid:16)(cid:12)
(cid:9)(cid:16)(cid:19) (cid:13)(cid:11)
(cid:7)(cid:7)(cid:8)(cid:17)(cid:18) (cid:26)(cid:11)(cid:28)(cid:18)(cid:14)
(cid:3)(cid:5)(cid:6)(cid:16)(cid:6) (cid:25)(cid:19)(cid:6)(cid:17)(cid:18)
(cid:4)(cid:11) (cid:20)
(cid:3)(cid:3) (cid:24)(cid:16)(cid:6)
(cid:2)(cid:15)(cid:5) (cid:15)(cid:11)
(cid:1)(cid:14) (cid:23)(cid:3)
(cid:0)(cid:13) (cid:5)
(cid:11)(cid:12) (cid:21)(cid:5)(cid:22)(cid:6)(cid:24)(cid:5)(cid:15)
(cid:10) (cid:11)
(cid:12)
(cid:19)
(cid:16)
(cid:15)
(cid:24)
(cid:27)
(cid:9)(cid:17)
(cid:16)
(cid:15)
(cid:7)(cid:14)(cid:4)
(cid:13)
(cid:11)(cid:12)
(cid:9)(cid:10)
(cid:8)
(cid:7)
(cid:7)
(cid:6)
(cid:5)(cid:4)
(cid:3)(cid:4)
(cid:2)
(cid:1)
(cid:13)
(cid:14)(cid:7)
(cid:19)(cid:15)
(cid:13)(cid:9) (cid:19)(cid:23)(cid:15)
(cid:12) (cid:19)(cid:19)(cid:20)(cid:17)
(cid:11) (cid:21)(cid:17)(cid:22)(cid:19)
(cid:8)(cid:9)(cid:10)(cid:9)(cid:17)(cid:18)(cid:19)(cid:9)(cid:16)(cid:9)(cid:20)(cid:9)(cid:16)(cid:9)(cid:17)(cid:19)(cid:9)(cid:16)(cid:9)(cid:19)(cid:9)(cid:16)(cid:9)
(cid:1)(cid:9)(cid:19)(cid:19)(cid:19)(cid:23)
(cid:6)(cid:7)(cid:9)(cid:16)(cid:18)(cid:21)(cid:17)(cid:20)
(cid:5)(cid:15)(cid:17)(cid:20)(cid:17)(cid:22)
(cid:3)(cid:4)
(cid:2)
(cid:1)
(cid:0)
(cid:0)
(cid:13)
(cid:5)
(cid:20)
(cid:22)
(cid:3)
(cid:1)
(cid:13)
(cid:18)
(cid:7)(cid:21)
(cid:1)
(cid:13)(cid:15)
(cid:6)(cid:9) (cid:12)(cid:11)
(cid:27)(cid:28)(cid:29)(cid:9)(cid:1)(cid:18) (cid:10)(cid:11)(cid:19)(cid:18)(cid:20)
(cid:27)(cid:12) (cid:9)(cid:3)(cid:18)
(cid:23)(cid:24)(cid:25)(cid:16)(cid:26)(cid:16)(cid:1)(cid:3)(cid:26)(cid:5)(cid:13)(cid:3)(cid:10)(cid:20) (cid:3)(cid:4)(cid:5)(cid:6)(cid:7)(cid:8)(cid:5)(cid:1)(cid:16)(cid:11)(cid:13)(cid:3)(cid:17)
(cid:30)(cid:6) (cid:0)(cid:1)(cid:2)(cid:6)(cid:1)
(cid:11)
(cid:15)
(cid:17) (cid:9)
(cid:4) (cid:13)
!"(cid:3) (cid:6)(cid:5)
(cid:6) (cid:14)
(cid:5)
(cid:22)
(cid:13)(cid:3)
(cid:11)
(cid:1)

(cid:13)
(cid:16)
(cid:24)
(cid:18)
(cid:31)
(cid:9)(cid:17)
(cid:16)
(cid:15)
(cid:7)(cid:14)(cid:4)
(cid:13)
(cid:11)(cid:12)
(cid:17) (cid:9)(cid:10)
(cid:4) (cid:8)
(cid:7)
(cid:25)"(cid:3) (cid:6)(cid:7)
(cid:5)& (cid:5)(cid:4)
%(cid:18) (cid:3)(cid:4)
(cid:13)(cid:3) (cid:1)(cid:2)
(cid:18)
$
(cid:20)
(cid:11)
#
(cid:0)
EXISTING
CONDITIONS

Exhibit II-4
Economic/
St. Mary’s County Population 1970 – 2005
Demographic
Characteristics of St.
120,000
Mary’s County
100,000
80,000
n
o
ati
ul 60,000
p
o
P
40,000
20,000
0
1970 1980 1990 2000 2005
Year
Source: U.S. Census Bureau and the Maryland Department of Planning

The projected population for St. Mary’s County appears in Exhibit II-5.
Continued growth averaging about twenty (20) percent per decade is
projected through 2030. The 2010 population is projected to be 108,150.
This is projected to grow to 152,150 by 2030.

Exhibit II-5
Projected St. Mary’s County Population 2005 – 2030
160,000
140,000
120,000
100,000
n
o
ulati 80,000
p
o
P 60,000
40,000
20,000
0
2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030
Year
Source: Maryland Department of Planning

6
EXISTING
CONDITIONS
Age
According to the State of Maryland Department of Planning 2005
Economic/
estimates U.S. Census, the largest age group in St. Mary’s County was
Demographic
between 20 and 44 years old, which comprise 35.5 percent of the
Characteristics of St.
population (see Exhibit II-6). The second largest age group is between 45
Mary’s County
and 64 years of age, which totaled 24.8 percent of the population.
Approximately 22.1 percent of the population in St. Mary’s County was
between 5 and 19 years old, while 9.8 percent was over 65 years old.

Exhibit II-6
St. Mary’s County 2005 Population by Age
65 years and older
45 to 64 years
e
g 20 to 44 years
A
5 to 19 years
Under age 5
0 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 25,000 30,000 35,000 40,000
Population
Source: Maryland Department of Planning

Projections of these different age groups appear in Exhibit II-7. This
shows a significant growth in the number of persons over 65 years of age.
This age group is projected to triple in number, and will comprise a
growing percentage of the population. In 2005, there were an estimated
9,510 persons over 65 years of age. In 2030, this is projected to grow to
over 30,000 persons. The percentage of this age group of the total
population will increase from 9.8 percent in 2005 to 20.0 percent in 2030.
All other age groups, while increasing in total number, will decrease in
percentage of the total population.

Exhibit II-7
Projection of St. Mary’s County Population by Age Group
2005 2010 2020 2030
Age Group Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent
Under age 5 7,530 7.8% 8,390 7.8% 9,560 7.3% 10,670 7.0%
5 to 19 years 21,320 22.1% 22,310 20.6% 26,700 20.4% 30,160 19.8%
20 to 44 years 34,280 35.5% 35,870 33.2% 42,510 32.4% 49,450 32.5%
45 to 64 years 23,910 24.8% 29,530 27.3% 32,870 25.1% 31,420 20.7%
65 years and older 9,510 9.8% 12,050 11.1% 19,560 14.9% 30,450 20.0%
Source: Maryland Department of Planning
7
EXISTING
CONDITIONS
Exhibit II-8 shows the density of persons aged 65 and older by U.S.
Census block group for St. Mary’s County. The largest concentrations of
Economic/
seniors are located in Lexington Park, Leonardtown, and Golden Beach.
Demographic
Areas of moderately high numbers of senior citizens are also located in
Characteristics of St.
Lexington Park as well as in Charlotte Hall. The lower densities of the
Mary’s County
elderly populations are located in the rural parts of St. Mary’s County,
reflecting the overall population densities.

Employment and Income
In 2004, the median household income was an estimated $60,550 per year.
The labor force in 2005 was 73,820 persons, which is expected to grow to
119,340 persons by 2030.

The U.S. Census reported that in 2000 there were 30,642 total households
located in St. Mary’s County. Reportedly, 2,074 households were below
the federal poverty level. This is 6.8 percent of the total households in St.
Mary’s County. Exhibit II-9 illustrates the density of households below
the poverty level. The highest concentration of households below the
poverty level is located in the Great Mills Road area of Lexington Park.

The number of vehicles available to a housing unit also is used as an
indicator of demand for transit service. There were 1,649 housing units
without an available vehicle in St. Mary’s County in 2000. This is about
5.4 percent of the households in St. Mary’s County. Exhibit II-10
illustrates the distribution of zero-vehicle housing units per square mile,
according to the U.S. Census data. The block group with the highest
density of zero-vehicle households is located along Great Mills Road in
Lexington Park. This is one of the same block groups that had the highest
concentration of households below the poverty level. Most other block
groups with relatively high concentrations of zero-vehicle households are
located in Lexington Park. Outside of Lexington Park, there is one block
group in Leonardtown that has over ten zero-vehicle households per
square mile.
Major Employers
Employment in St. Mary’s County is dominated by the public sector,
primarily defense-related jobs. According to the County Department of
Economic and Community Development, there are approximately 7,000
federal civil service jobs in St. Mary’s County. Other public sector
employment includes 3,000 military, 1,896 public schools, 835 state, and
725 County employees.

8