DOT Transportation Engineering Projects
Take our survey about the BRT alternatives for New Hampshire Ave. The survey will be open until June 30.
This planning study will define the roadway treatment, station locations, and end points of the New Hampshire Avenue BRT service
Transit Project
Project Manager: Justin Willits [email protected]
The Montgomery County Department of Transportation (MCDOT) is advancing BRT for the New Hampshire Avenue corridor consistent with the 2013 Countywide Transit Corridors Functional Master Plan. Flash will provide high quality transit service that improves the speed and reliability of bus service in the corridor.
The New Hampshire Avenue BRT Study will engage the public and:
New Hampshire Ave Flash Map Click image to enlarge
The project is currently in the planning phase where the major elements of the project will be defined.
Click here for information about past events.
Your feedback can guide our understanding and improvement of the proposed system. In the survey, you can learn about the alternatives—for more details, check out the Resources section. The survey will close on June 30, 2025.
Our project team can be reached at [email protected]. We are happy to hear your thoughts and answer your questions. We are also available to speak to your organization or at community events about the project.
Join our mailing list to receive project updates and notification of upcoming events.
Corridor Advisory Committees follow Master Plan guidance as approved by the Montgomery County Council: “A vital facet of facility planning is to receive input and feedback from affected property owners, civic and business groups, and transit riders and road users, including public forums and workshops, electronic newsletters, and other forms of outreach. Accordingly, a citizens' advisory group comprised of residents, business owners and other relevant stakeholders must be created for each corridor which enters into facility planning to make recommendations to the County on the design, construction and proposed station locations for the transit corridor.
Click here for information about CAC meetings
Kevin Belanger Interested Resident
Sophie Boreshe Interested Resident
Marie Michelle Bunch Interested Resident
Hector Chang Interested Resident
Raka Choudhury Interested Resident
Brian Downie Saul Centers
Eileen Finnegan Interested Resident
Gail Fisher Interested Resident
Richard Garifo Interested Resident
Gretchen Goldman Interested Resident
Craig Grunewald Interested Resident
Kayleigh Gunnoud Takoma Langley Crossroads Development Authority
June Henderson Friends of White Oak
Miguel Hernandez Interested Resident
Louis Krupnick, A.I.A., LEED Interested Resident
Maura Moser Interested Resident
Peter Myo Khin Tamarack Triangle Civic Association
Daphne Pallozzi CHI Centers, Inc.
Robert Peters Colesville Civic Association
Shane Pollin Hillandale Gateway, LLC
Elise Rahimi Interested Resident
James Shippey Interested Resident
Peter Tantisunthorn Interested Resident
Clay Teunis Interested Resident
Jason Weaver Interested Resident
Dan Wilhelm Greater Colesville Citizens Association
Elizabeth Williams Interested Resident
Your unique perspective, whether you live, work, or travel in this area, is essential to our planning process. Review the proposed alternatives and then fill out the alternatives survey.
A low-cost solution involving Flash BRT buses mixing with general traffic. Flash BRT buses will be allowed to skip long queues at intersections with special queue jump lanes. More details are available in the Alternative 1 layout PDF.
Alternative 1 Example Street Cross Section Click image to enlarge
Alternative 1 Map Click image to enlarge
A low-cost solution involving Flash BRT buses mixing with general traffic with queue jumps on the northern portion of New Hampshire Avenue. On the southern portion, buses have their own exclusive bus lane, running alongside the curb. More details are available in the Alternative 2 layout PDF.
Alternative 2 Example Street Cross Section Click image to enlarge
Alternative 2 Map Click image to enlarge
A high-cost solution which involves Flash buses using exclusive lanes in the median of the street (which are more expensive to construct). Local buses share the rest of the street with general traffic. More details are available in the Alternative 3 layout PDF.
Alternative 3 Example Street Cross Section Click image to enlarge
Alternative 3 Map Click image to enlarge
A high-cost solution involving buses using exclusive lanes in the median of the road (which are more expensive to construct). This solution involves more dual median lanes than single median lanes. More details are available in the Alternative 4 layout PDF.
Alternative 4 Example Street Cross Section Click image to enlarge
Alternative 4 Map Click image to enlarge
A low-cost solution involving Flash BRT buses mixing with traffic in some areas, and using exclusive lanes along the curb in others. More details are available in the Hybrid Alternative layout PDF.
Hybrid Alternative Example Street Cross Section Click image to enlarge
Hybrid Alternative Map Click image to enlarge
Each of the alternatives were analyzed on a scale of how well they perform relative to the project goals and to each other for the Flash BRT travel time, the local bus travel time, general traffic travel time, construction cost, and property impact. Analysis of the alternatives found:
Alternative Analysis Table Click image to enlarge
More than 20 buses per hour serve some portions of the corridor. Destinations include Fort Totten, Silver Spring, and Takoma Park. South of Piney Branch Rd, buses arrive every 3-4 minutes at peak times.
Bus speeds are often below 10 mph. Buses are slower in the PM than the AM.
Many bus stops lack amenities, such as seating and shelters. There is an opportunity to make biking and walking safer and more accessible throughout the corridor.
Most of the corridor is adjacent to lower income and non-English speaking areas. Many languages are spoken by corridor residents.
Mixed land use (commercial, retail and residential) is focused around major intersections. There are several transportation and land development projects in study area.
Injury and fatal crashes are most common between the Beltway and University Blvd.
AM travel times are high south of the Beltway. PM travel times are very high between University Blvd and the Beltway.
AM delay is highest at major intersections near the District of Columbia. PM delay is highest near the Beltway.
Interactive Map of Alternatives (as of June 2024)
CAC Meeting #6 (Tuesday, April 29, 2025)
CAC Meeting #5 (Wednesday, January 31, 2024)
CAC Meeting #4 (Thursday, May 18, 2023)
CAC Meeting #3 (Thursday, December 15, 2022)
CAC Meeting #2 (Thursday, June 2, 2022)
CAC Meeting #1 (Wednesday, April 5, 2022)
Public Meeting #2 (Wednesday, May 14, 2025)
Public Meeting #1 (Wednesday, June 15, 2022)
The project is funded for the planning phase. Future design and construction phases are currently unfunded.