DOT Transportation Engineering Projects

 

We need your input!

Take our survey about the BRT alternatives for New Hampshire Ave. The survey will be open until June 30.

 

New Hampshire Flash Bus Rapid Transit (BRT)

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]

 

 

Description

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:

  • Consider multiple approaches to improve bus speed and reliability
  • Define route end points and future station locations
  • Identify station accessibility needs
  • Consider how to connect with existing transit
  • Document potential impacts or tradeoffs for consideration

New Hampshire Ave Flash Map
Click image to enlarge

Overview map of New Hampshire Ave Flash BRT corridor from DC-MD line to Randolph Rd

Updates

Project Timeline

Project Status Phases Timeline. The project was written into the area master plan in 2013. The project is now in the Corridor Study phase, until winter 2025. Undated phases to follow include environmental evaluation, preliminary design, final design and construction.

Current Project Status

The project is currently in the planning phase where the major elements of the project will be defined.

The project team is soliciting feedback from the public about the alternatives being studied for the New Hampshire Avenue BRT. Details about the alternatives and a survey are available for review and input.

Get Involved

Click here for information about past events.

Fill out the New Hampshire Avenue BRT Alternatives Survey!

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.

Take the survey!

Contact Us

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.

Sign up for email updates

Corridor Advisory Committee

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

Resources

All About the New Hampshire Avenue BRT Alternatives

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.

Results of Alternative Analysis

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:

  • The hybrid alternative received the best overall evaluation due to its improvements to local bus travel time, favorable BRT travel time, and relatively lower construction costs and property impacts compared to alternatives #3 and #4.
  • Alternative #1 performed the best for general traffic travel time but provided the least benefit to travel time for local bus and BRT.
  • Alternatives #3 and #4 would require high construction cost and property impacts, and while the BRT would have the best relative travel time in this alternative, the local bus travel time would be adversely impacted, as they would continue to operate in mixed traffic, not in the dedicated transit lanes.

Alternative Analysis Table
Click image to enlarge

Hybrid alternative has the most results that help achieve the BRT goals, including good results for Flash BRT travel time and local bus travel time, low construction costs and property impact, and fair results for general traffic travel time. Alternative 1 rates poor for Flash BRT travel time, fair for local bus travel time, good for general traffic travel time, and low for construction cost and property impact. Alternative 2 rates fair for Flash BRT travel time, good for local bus travel time, fair for general traffic travel time, and low for construction cost and property impact. Alternative 3 rates good for Flash BRT travel time, poor for local bus travel time, fair for general traffic travel time, and high for construction cost and property impact. Alternative 4 rates fair for Flash BRT travel time, poor for local bus travel time and general traffic travel time, and high for construction cost and property impact. Key for the alternatives analysis table. Green means BRT goals are well-achieved. Orange means BRT goals are somewhat achieved. Red means BRT goals are not well achieved.

Existing Conditions (Transit Access, Demographics, Land Use)

Map Archive

Interactive Map of Alternatives (as of June 2024)

Past Meeting Documents

 

Funding

The project is funded for the planning phase. Future design and construction phases are currently unfunded.

Budget Details