Chesapeake Bay Crossing Study

Tier I draft recommends Kent Island site

Dorchester Banner
Posted 2/26/21

ANNAPOLIS — The state’s initial conclusion in a multi-year study on a possible new Chesapeake Bay crossing has led planners to the current site, Kent Island. The Tier I Draft …

You must be a member to read this story.

Join our family of readers for as little as $5 per month and support local, unbiased journalism.


Already a member? Log in to continue.   Otherwise, follow the link below to join.

Please log in to continue

Log in
Chesapeake Bay Crossing Study

Tier I draft recommends Kent Island site

Posted

ANNAPOLIS — The state’s initial conclusion in a multi-year study on a possible new Chesapeake Bay crossing has led planners to the current site, Kent Island. The Tier I Draft Environmental Statement (DEIS) was released on Feb. 23, with extensive details of the process and the information collected.

Meetings took place around the state in recent years, with public participation and comment being taken into account as transportation officials worked towards alleviating congestion at both ends of the William Preston Lane, Jr. Memorial Bridge. Commuters year-round and vacationers, especially on summer weekends, have grown accustomed, if not accepting, of miles of backed up traffic on Kent Island and at Sandy Point on the western shore.
The bridge itself comprises two spans: The original, two-lane structure was built in the 1950s to replace ferries, while the second, three-lane span went up in the 1970s as beach destinations grew more popular and easily accessible.

Getting vacationers to and from the beaches safely and efficiently provides a powerful boost to Maryland’s economy. And as more urban and suburban dwellers opt for the quieter pace of life on the Eastern Shore, commuting across the Bay added traffic.
Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS)
The Tier 1 Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) for the Chesapeake Bay Crossing Study is now available for review and comment. Originally scheduled for December, release of the DEIS was delayed due to concerns with rising state COVID-19 rates and associated restrictions.
The DEIS evaluated four retained alternatives, including the No-Build Alternative and three Corridor Alternatives Retained for Analysis (CARA) that were presented to the public in the Fall of 2019. Corridor 7, from Sandy Point to Kent Island, has been identified as the Maryland Transportation Authority – Recommended Preferred Corridor Alternative based on analysis of a wide range of engineering and environmental factors and input received through public comments and coordination with State and federal agencies.
Per Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act, MDTA and FHWA have initiated consultation with the Maryland Historical Trust, Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, and other parties to identify historic properties within the CARA. “We welcome public comments regarding historic properties and the Section 106 process during the DEIS comment period,” a statement from the MDTA said.

Top three corridors
Three corridor alternatives were identified as Corridor Alternatives Retained for Analysis (CARA) as a result of the screening process applied to the 14 initial corridors.
CORRIDOR 6: Connects Pasadena and Centreville. Follows MD 177 and ties in with MD 100 on Western Shore; does not follow existing road network on Eastern Shore to tie into US 301.
CORRIDOR 7: Follows MD 214/424 and ties into existing US 50 interchange on Western Shore; does not follow existing road network on Eastern Shore to connect to US 50.
CORRIDOR 8: Follows existing road network along US 50/301 from west of the Severn River on the Western Shore to US 50/301 split on the Eastern Shore; includes location of existing Bay Bridge.

Pros and cons
“These three corridors were the only ones meeting all elements of the purpose and need, and were carried forward for further analysis in the DEIS,” the statement said. “They were anticipated to provide adequate capacity, dependable and reliable travel times, and flexibility to support maintenance and incident management at the existing bridge. Furthermore, the CARA achieved the goal of reducing congestion better than all other corridors — a goal that was emphasized by public input collected at the Fall 2019 Open Houses.”
The evaluation of resource distribution and potential for avoidance yielded differing results for the numerous different resources. Many resources were identified that could not be avoided, such as 100-year floodplains and Chesapeake Bay Critical Areas.
Aquatic resources such as submerged aquatic vegetation and oyster resources often cover the full width of the open water portions of the corridors. Other resources such as community facilities could potentially be avoided in some cases, though further analysis would be required.

Lower impact
Corridor 7 would potentially have lower overall environmental impacts due to the shorter crossing length and ability to utilize existing on-land infrastructure along US 50/301, the statement said. Corridors 6 and 8 would require longer crossings and more roadway along new alignment, likely resulting in greater impacts to sensitive environmental resources in and around the Chesapeake Bay, especially tidal wetlands and aquatic resources.
Corridor 7 could have greater impacts to noise sensitive areas and socioeconomic resources such as community facilities and commercial areas due to the more developed nature of the corridor compared to Corridors 6 and 8.
The analysis of indirect and cumulative effects determined that Corridors 6 and 8 could result in substantial land use changes on the Eastern Shore.

Providing access to undeveloped land on the Eastern Shore in proximity to major employment centers such as Baltimore and Washington, D.C. could lead to increased demand for unplanned residential development in the rural areas of Corridor 6 and 8.
Corridor 7, in contrast, would be more compatible with existing and planned future land uses. Public and agency input emphasized the potential for induced growth effects of a new crossing as a topic of particular importance for this Tier 1 study.
Public comment - online
Beginning Feb. 23, the DEIS and public hearing materials have been available for review in the Virtual Information Room (VIR). The public is encouraged to review these materials and provide comment. If you are unable to access the DEIS via the website or if additional assistance is required, please call 877-249-8370 or email the project team.
In the VIR, attendees will have the opportunity to review information on the Tier 1 DEIS and the MDTA-Recommended Preferred Corridor Alternative; register to give public or one-on-one testimony; and learn how to submit and provide written comments.

Live Testimony Sessions
Call-in testimony
1-3 p.m. and 6-8 p.m., April 14 and 15
Register to provide call-in testimony
In-person testimony
6-8 p.m.
• April 21
DoubleTree by Hilton
Hotel Annapolis
210 Holiday Ct
Annapolis
• April 22
Kent Island
American Legion Hall
800 Romancoke Rd
Stevensville
To register to provide in-person testimony, call 877-249-8370.

The Maryland Transportation Authority (MDTA) owns, finances, operates, and maintains the William Preston Lane, Jr. Memorial (Bay) Bridge and is conducting the $5 million Bay Crossing Study. Funded by toll dollars, the Bay Crossing Study Tier 1 began in 2016 and is expected to be completed this year.

Members and subscribers make this story possible.
You can help support non-partisan, community journalism.

x
X