Prince George's County - Comprehensive Traffic Safety Audit - Maryland Route 202 and Maryland Route 704 PG 303-26
Summary
HB 419 requires the Maryland Department of Transportation to conduct a comprehensive traffic safety audit of Maryland Route 202 and Maryland Route 704 in Prince George’s County. The audit must examine crash history and traffic risk trends, identify safety problems in roadway infrastructure, engineering, traffic control, and operations, and recommend corrective actions and crash-reduction measures. It must also consider strategies to improve safety for drivers, passengers, bicyclists, and pedestrians, and include community input.
The Department must submit its findings and recommendations to the Prince George’s County Delegation to the General Assembly by December 31, 2026. The bill is temporary: it takes effect June 1, 2026, and automatically expires on June 30, 2027. As drafted, it does not itself change roadway design standards or mandate construction projects, but it creates a formal state review process that could lead to future safety improvements and funding or policy decisions for the affected corridors.
Impact
HB 419 would impose a one-time reporting and study requirement on the Maryland Department of Transportation for two specific state routes in Prince George’s County, creating a temporary obligation to evaluate safety conditions and propose remedies. It affects MDOT’s planning and analysis responsibilities and directs the resulting report to the Prince George’s County Delegation, but it does not directly amend substantive transportation statutes or require immediate physical changes to the roads.
Sentiment
The bill appears to reflect a generally proactive, safety-focused approach, with its emphasis on crash reduction, vulnerable road users, and community input suggesting support for addressing known roadway concerns. Because there are no recorded committee transcripts or votes in the provided material, there is no documented opposition or formal debate to gauge broader sentiment. The bill’s temporary, study-oriented structure also suggests it is intended as a targeted local safety measure rather than a controversial statewide policy change.
Contention
No specific points of contention are documented in the provided record. If concerns were raised, they would likely center on the scope of the audit, the cost and timing of MDOT’s work, or whether the bill should lead to immediate infrastructure action rather than only a report. The bill’s local focus on Prince George’s County routes 202 and 704 may also be viewed as either appropriately targeted or too limited, depending on stakeholder perspective.