State Treasurer Nancy Kopp, Governor Marting O’Malley and Comptroller Peter Franchot.

In late October 2011, Maryland’s Board of Public Works – comprised of Governor Martin O’Malley, Comptroller Peter Franchot and Treasurer Nancy Kopp – approved a little-noticed package of regulatory changes for new and replacement public school construction that could help enhance smart growth in the state.

In 2002, the National Trust for Historic Preservation informed us, “Why Johnny Can’t Walk to School.”  This groundbreaking report highlighted how shortsighted school construction policies and short term cost considerations across the country undermine existing neighborhood schools and result in the construction of new schools located outside of communities. The reasons were many – overly large acreage standards oriented to suburban design standards; escalating land costs in existing or planned communities; lack of effective communication between local planning departments and school facility planners; and numerous state policies across the nation favoring new school construction in farm fields over sites in existing or planned communities.

In 2007, the Maryland Department of Planning (MDP) decided to examine school construction and planning practices as they relate to Maryland. This culminated in it’s the 2008 Models & Guidelines publication “Smart Growth, Community Planning and Public School Construction,”. The publication drew national attention and many questions. Ultimately, it started a process of scrutinizing Maryland’s school construction practices with a focus on school siting procedures, capital funding processes and compact/vertical design options for new schools. A broad-based workgroup studied these issues and reported on each one. Three reports which were submitted to the Task Force on the Future for Growth and Development in the summer of 2009. The key recommendation of the workgroup was for “school construction funding decisions to be subject to Priority Funding Area (PFA) Review in a similar manner to state funding decisions on water & sewer and transportation infrastructure.”

On Wednesday, October 19, 2011, the Maryland Board of Public Works approved a set of regulatory changes governing the Maryland Public School Construction Program.  These changes promote location decisions and school construction funding for sustainable community-based new public school construction throughout Maryland. These changes to Section 23.03.02 of COMAR, Administration of the Public School Construction Program, are focused in two areas:  The Capital Improvement Program and Site Selection for New Schools.

How does this change affect the process? Well, when a school system – more formally known as a Local Education Agency or LEA – proposes to build a new school or to increase the state rated capacity (student seat capacity) of a replacement school outside of a PFA, the LEA must request a waiver for approval of planning of the school facility and also funding for construction.

Additionally, unless a waiver is granted, a proposed site for a new school or a replacement school that adds capacity must be located within a PFA.

By requiring PFA review of school construction projects and site approval, Maryland has created a powerful incentive for communities to build new schools in existing neighborhoods, which are far more likely to be pedestrian-friendly or capable of being retrofitted than locations in outlying areas.

This significant step by the Board of Public Works marks a new era toward better decision-making by local and state governments about where new and replacement schools are built.  Schools within PFA’s – whether new or replacement – support the design of pedestrian-friendly communities in which homes, stores and offices as well as libraries, parks, recreation centers and other public facilities are well connected and possibly accessible by foot or bicycle. This as compared to sites isolated from one another and accessible only by motor vehicle travel. Schools located within communities in this manner reduce long term transportation costs and can improve the public health of the students they serve.

With improved community design guidelines that emphasize connectivity of streets and improved walking and bicycle access, schools can once again be anchors that promote the use of active transportation in Maryland communities.

From the public health perspective, experts emphasize the importance of walking or bicycling to school and other routine physical activity as vital to reversing the childhood obesity epidemic. In 2007, 29 percent of Maryland children ages 10 to 17 – nearly one in three – were obese or overweight , putting them at increased risk for serious health problems.[i] The Centers for Disease Control (CDC) warns that if current trends continue, one-third of all American adults will have diabetes in 2050.[ii] In addition, vehicle emissions, including particulates from diesel vehicles and the emissions of cars idling around schools as parents wait to pick up their children after school, are shown to contribute to the rise in childhood asthma rates.

A recent report for the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) points to mounting evidence that moderately intense physical activity like walking and bicycling can help prevent disease and disability and improve overall health. Maryland Department of Transportation (MDOT) and Maryland’s regional and local transportation agencies are now considering human health in their planning on the assumption that increasing the share of “non-motorized” trips (walking and bicycling) can yield improved public health outcomes.

From the fiscal perspective, the cost of transporting students from home to school can be reduced by locating schools in communities. School bus costs have surged in recent years – Maryland spent $225.1 million on student transportation in the 2009-2010 school year. This is a 28 percent jump from the $175.5 million Maryland spent during the 2005-2006 school year. These higher costs are not due to school enrollment growth – transportation costs per pupil rose 26 percent, from $751 to $949, during the same period.[iii] This is not a trend that can be sustained by the state or by local government budgets over the next decade.

Maryland’s new approach towards school siting and construction within PFA’s can be viewed as a significant first step to reverse these serious public health trends and annual escalation in school related transportation costs. Perhaps with an increased focus on Safe Routes to Schools and improved sidewalk and trail access connecting schools and neighborhoods, in the future both Johnny and Jenny will be able to safely walk or bicycle to schools in the communities in which they live throughout Maryland.

State Treasurer Nancy Kopp, Governor Marting O’Malley and Comptroller Peter Franchot.

In late October 2011, Maryland’s Board of Public Works – comprised of Governor Martin O’Malley, Comptroller Peter Franchot and Treasurer Nancy Kopp – approved a little-noticed package of regulatory changes for new and replacement public school construction that could help enhance smart growth in the state.

In 2002, the National Trust for Historic Preservation informed us, “Why Johnny Can’t Walk to School.”  This groundbreaking report highlighted how shortsighted school construction policies and short term cost considerations across the country undermine existing neighborhood schools and result in the construction of new schools located outside of communities. The reasons were many – overly large acreage standards oriented to suburban design standards; escalating land costs in existing or planned communities; lack of effective communication between local planning departments and school facility planners; and numerous state policies across the nation favoring new school construction in farm fields over sites in existing or planned communities.

In 2007, the Maryland Department of Planning (MDP) decided to examine school construction and planning practices as they relate to Maryland. This culminated in it’s the 2008 Models & Guidelines publication “Smart Growth, Community Planning and Public School Construction,”. The publication drew national attention and many questions. Ultimately, it started a process of scrutinizing Maryland’s school construction practices with a focus on school siting procedures, capital funding processes and compact/vertical design options for new schools. A broad-based workgroup studied these issues and reported on each one. Three reports which were submitted to the Task Force on the Future for Growth and Development in the summer of 2009. The key recommendation of the workgroup was for “school construction funding decisions to be subject to Priority Funding Area (PFA) Review in a similar manner to state funding decisions on water & sewer and transportation infrastructure.”

On Wednesday, October 19, 2011, the Maryland Board of Public Works approved a set of regulatory changes governing the Maryland Public School Construction Program.  These changes promote location decisions and school construction funding for sustainable community-based new public school construction throughout Maryland. These changes to Section 23.03.02 of COMAR, Administration of the Public School Construction Program, are focused in two areas:  The Capital Improvement Program and Site Selection for New Schools.

How does this change affect the process? Well, when a school system – more formally known as a Local Education Agency or LEA – proposes to build a new school or to increase the state rated capacity (student seat capacity) of a replacement school outside of a PFA, the LEA must request a waiver for approval of planning of the school facility and also funding for construction.

Additionally, unless a waiver is granted, a proposed site for a new school or a replacement school that adds capacity must be located within a PFA.

By requiring PFA review of school construction projects and site approval, Maryland has created a powerful incentive for communities to build new schools in existing neighborhoods, which are far more likely to be pedestrian-friendly or capable of being retrofitted than locations in outlying areas.

This significant step by the Board of Public Works marks a new era toward better decision-making by local and state governments about where new and replacement schools are built.  Schools within PFA’s – whether new or replacement – support the design of pedestrian-friendly communities in which homes, stores and offices as well as libraries, parks, recreation centers and other public facilities are well connected and possibly accessible by foot or bicycle. This as compared to sites isolated from one another and accessible only by motor vehicle travel. Schools located within communities in this manner reduce long term transportation costs and can improve the public health of the students they serve.

With improved community design guidelines that emphasize connectivity of streets and improved walking and bicycle access, schools can once again be anchors that promote the use of active transportation in Maryland communities.

From the public health perspective, experts emphasize the importance of walking or bicycling to school and other routine physical activity as vital to reversing the childhood obesity epidemic. In 2007, 29 percent of Maryland children ages 10 to 17 – nearly one in three – were obese or overweight , putting them at increased risk for serious health problems.[i] The Centers for Disease Control (CDC) warns that if current trends continue, one-third of all American adults will have diabetes in 2050.[ii] In addition, vehicle emissions, including particulates from diesel vehicles and the emissions of cars idling around schools as parents wait to pick up their children after school, are shown to contribute to the rise in childhood asthma rates.

A recent report for the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) points to mounting evidence that moderately intense physical activity like walking and bicycling can help prevent disease and disability and improve overall health. Maryland Department of Transportation (MDOT) and Maryland’s regional and local transportation agencies are now considering human health in their planning on the assumption that increasing the share of “non-motorized” trips (walking and bicycling) can yield improved public health outcomes.

From the fiscal perspective, the cost of transporting students from home to school can be reduced by locating schools in communities. School bus costs have surged in recent years – Maryland spent $225.1 million on student transportation in the 2009-2010 school year. This is a 28 percent jump from the $175.5 million Maryland spent during the 2005-2006 school year. These higher costs are not due to school enrollment growth – transportation costs per pupil rose 26 percent, from $751 to $949, during the same period.[iii] This is not a trend that can be sustained by the state or by local government budgets over the next decade.

Maryland’s new approach towards school siting and construction within PFA’s can be viewed as a significant first step to reverse these serious public health trends and annual escalation in school related transportation costs. Perhaps with an increased focus on Safe Routes to Schools and improved sidewalk and trail access connecting schools and neighborhoods, in the future both Johnny and Jenny will be able to safely walk or bicycle to schools in the communities in which they live throughout Maryland.