David Alpert - Greater Greater Washington

Some are pushing to limit sidewalk cycling

Wed, 19 Jun 2013 14:46:00 EDT

People riding bicycles often feel threatened by the minority of rude drivers who get impatient at having to wait behind a slow vehicle and pass too closely, honk, or turn without looking. People walking also feel threatened by a rude minority of bicycle riders who ride quickly on a sidewalk without regard for pedestrians. What should we do?

Photo by Karl-Ludwig G. Poggemann on Flickr.

Some residents are trying to push for new laws that limit bicycling on sidewalks, an InTowner editorial reports. In DC, it's not legal to ride on sidewalks south of Massachusetts Avenue in the central business district; some cities outlaw riding on sidewalks entirely.

Truly, a few people are behaving badly. Someone on a bike was riding fairly quickly past my pregnant wife and myself as we were crossing through Dupont Circle; he suddenly swerved and very nearly hit her. Perhaps something must be done. On the other hand, any cyclist can recount experiences almost being hit by an inattentive driver. If the driver does hit the cyclist, very little is done.

The InTowner is concerned about people:

zooming along sidewalks and not giving warning or careening around a corner into a one-way street but going in opposite direction so that pedestrians who are crossing and looking in the direction of on-coming traffic are blindsided by a speeding cyclist coming from the unexpected, wrong direction.

I would have few objections to a measure that specifically stops these behaviors. The bigger question is, how can we differentiate them from times that sidewalk cycling is not hurting anyone?

There are many places in the city that simply feel too inhospitable, especially to a less experienced cyclist. More cycle tracks and bike lanes can fix that. In the meantime, a ban on sidewalk riding even in these harrowing areas will simply push more people to drive.

The Logan Circle ANC passed a resolution asking the District Department of Transportation to analyze potential changes to the law, like:

a. Expanding the area in which riding bicycles on sidewalks is prohibited to streets where (i) population density or infrastructure limitations make it unsafe for pedestrians, (ii) bike lanes are already available for bicyclists, (iii) other factors that, in DDOT's view, support extending the prohibition and that (iv) recommends limited exemptions for the public's safety, such as bicyclists 12 yrs old and under;
b. Reducing the speed limit for bikes traveling on sidewalks;
c. Whether existing penalties encourage compliance with the law.

To the ANC's credit, these are pretty narrow requests; they're not pushing for a blanket ban. Where sidewalks are particularly crowded, and also there are bike lanes, it's particularly nonsensical to ride on the sidewalk. (The other day, I saw someone riding on the sidewalk on L Street, on the same side of the street as the cycle track, in the same direction. What the heck?)

However, there are many legitimate reasons at times to ride slowly along sidewalks, give pedestrians a wide berth, and only carefully edge around corners. The biggest justifiable reason, in my experience, is one-way streets. In past decades, we've made streets one way to speed motor vehicle traffic, but that presents large obstacles to cyclists, especially when the routes in the other direction are especially bike-unfriendly.

Contraflow lanes, like the ones DDOT is planning next to H Street NE, can address many of these problems. There need to be many more of these to make people feel safe while cycling, however. We could use them on 17th Street in Dupont, a one-way street with very narrow and crowded sidewalks and at best poor alternatives.

Two years ago, I suggested a common-sense rule for sidewalk riding:

Ride on the sidewalk if you don't feel comfortable on the street, or if it's one-way the wrong way, but NOT if the sidewalk is crowded.
If you do ride on the sidewalk, assume that all pedestrians are inviolate. It's their sidewalk, not yours; you are a guest. You can use it as long as you don't get in their way.
Treat them like they are...say...zombies. Pedestrians move slowly, and you can't make them change direction, but you absolutely don't want to touch them.

Is there any way to put this into law? Probably not. Is there any law that would curb the worst behaviors without making okay behavior illegal?

Meanwhile, if we're talking about ways the law doesn't reflect our expectations, cyclists can give plenty of examples. If we're trying to make the laws of our streets prescribe reasonable rules for all modes, then let's not just make more cycling illegal, but actually fix the laws to not shoehorn cycling into the same box as driving.

Pedestrians want to feel safe on the sidewalks. That's reasonable. Cyclists want to have a way to get around and feel safe, too. Both are worthwhile motivations. We need to find solutions that to ensure everyone feels safe, not just have one group of vulnerable road users try to attack the rights of another, different group. Is there a solution?

50 comments

Breakfast links: Where and how the people go

Wed, 19 Jun 2013 08:54:00 EDT

by David Alpert

Photo by Doug Kerr on Flickr.

People up, driving down: The region's population has grown, but driving declined from 2005 to 2011, says a TPB report. Miles per person dropped 10% in outer suburbs and 5.6% in the core. (City Paper)

Baltimore wants to "poach" residents: With a new market, lower property taxes, new schools, and weekend MARC service, Baltimore hopes to attract more residents, including ones priced out of the Washington region. (WBJ)

Now white and black people lose rights: People are understandably worried about massive government violations of the Fourth Amendment. If you're black in many cities, you've probably had your rights violated regularly for years by practices like New York's "stop and frisk," says Courtland Milloy. (Post)

Bases get smart (growth): 4 military bases are using Smart Growth principles of denser, mixed-use, walkable, and bikeable communities as part of a pilot project. (Streetsblog) ... Will coming growth at Belvoir, Meade, and Andrews follow suit?

Metro intercoms sort-of-broken?: When some kids started to fight on a Red Line train people called the train operator who notified police, but the riders couldn't tell if they had reached the operator at all. (DCist)

Is it gentrification?: That study of DC neighborhoods we discussed yesterday never called neighborhoods "gentrifying." But Michael Neibauer still sees gentrification coming to areas like Anacostia and Deanwood. (City Paper, WBJ)

Congress Heights needs food options: Coming federal offices at Saint Elizabeths won't have a lot of food options on campus, to encourage people to interact with the community. But the neighborhood commercial strip will have to change quite a lot to accommodate these workers, or else only food trucks will meet their needs. (CHOTR)

Fighting continues at Manassas: The Park Service insists it won't allow the Bi-County Parkway through Manassas Battlefield unless Routes 234 and 29 are closed. Growing numbers say the whole thing will just make east-west traffic worse. (WAMU)

And...: H Street might get a Whole Foods, but where exactly still isn't clear. (City Paper) ... Behind the Randall School, metal and glass. (WBJ) ... Some Congressmen want to cut Amtrak, again. (WAMU) ... A dump truck hit a pedestrian at 4th and Mass, NW. (DCist)

Have a tip for the links? Submit it here.

20 comments

Focus transportation on downtown or neighborhoods?

Tue, 18 Jun 2013 13:17:00 EDT

by David Alpert and Rahul Mereand-Sinha

Should the design of major roads and our big transit projects favor moving large numbers of people in and out of downtown? Or should DC focus on making streets feel more like neighborhood streets, and transportation investments that help people travel within and between neighborhoods?

Photo by Roger Wollstadt on Flickr.

This is the major tradeoff that residents considered in a series of public meetings that concluded last week for MoveDC, a project which aims to create a citywide transportation plan.

Planners from the District Department of Transportation (DDOT) presented participants with 3 scenarios which keep things as they are, prioritize transportation to and from the downtown core, or focus on neighborhoods.

Scenarios set different priorities

All of the scenarios include finishing 22 miles of streetcars, the bridge megaprojects like the South Capitol Street racetrack, putting performance parking in busy commercial areas, expanding CaBi and bike trails and lanes, and more.

Stay the Course, the first scenario, sticks with these and keeps allocating resources and space to a balance of long-distance and short-distance travel.

Get To the Center focuses on the downtown areas, still the main engines of DC's economy. This option makes it easier to get to downtown by car and transit, such as by timing signals to maximize traffic flow to and from the core.

DC would invest in transit to and from Maryland and Virginia, like new Metro lines across the Potomac, or commuter rail capacity. Bike trails and cycle tracks that travel to or from downtown would get the highest priority.

Travel would not necessarily be free; this scenario includes a proposal for a congestion charge for private vehicle trips downtown to help pay for infrastructure that gets people downtown.

Connect the Neighborhoods instead focuses on helping people get around within and between neighborhoods. Most capital would go to facilities that help people cross geographic barriers like Rock Creek Park or the Anacostia River. Local streets would put walking, biking, and short-distance local traffic first, such as with medians that make it easier to cross.

New transit would also serve neighborhood needs more than commuters in and out of the city, such as the full proposed 37-mile streetcar system, or buses like the Circulator that connect "activity centers."

This scenario posits that DC needs to decentralize its jobs and retail. As the city grows, a single downtown can't serve all of the needs, and therefore this scenario assumes that more mixed-use zoning will let people work all over the city instead of all cramming the main downtown routes to jobs in the center, which is almost entirely built out.

Georgia Avenue. Photo by IntangibleArts on Flickr.

In reality, any actual plan will combine elements of all of these and not go 100% in the direction of core-oriented or neighborhood-oriented transportation. Still, it's a useful discussion, as it helps us think through our priorities. Financial constraints mean we can't build every transportation project anyone has suggested. How do we prioritize investments?

Plus, roadways have finite space. On 16th Street in Columbia Heights, for instance, there have been dueling proposals to build a median, which would make the road safer to cross, or a dedicated bus lane, which would help buses get through the area. Off-peak parking on major arterials creates significant congestion at the edges of rush hour. Bike lanes, dedicated transit lanes, and parking all vie for roadway space.

Land use matters, too

It's mostly outside DDOT's purview, but any discussion of downtown versus neighborhoods can't be complete without thinking about land use. Transportation is about getting people to places they need to be: housing, jobs, stores, schools, and so on.

Where will DC grow? Any proposal to grow anywhere meets with some opposition. Can the city develop a consensus to grow in particular places rather than others?

The city could grow mostly in the center. That would protect neighborhood character, something resident activists often speak about. On the other hand, it would probably not mean a lot more neighborhood retail. Most of all, though, there isn't actually much room to grow in the center without changes to the height limit.

Do we want to relax the height limit downtown and create a much busier and denser central business district? That land use scenario fits well with the Get To the Center transportation scenario.

Or, does DC want to decentralize? Put more growth around Metro stations, frequent bus lines, and future streetcar lines in all neighborhoods? That would bring more jobs, residents, and retail to many neighborhoods. However, it requires making sure there's room for this growth.

If every new building meets opposition and the Historic Preservation Review Board wants to shave a floor or two off every proposal in one of the myriad historic districts, neighborhoods won't be able to grow enough to decentralize the city.

But if we do want to help each neighborhood become more self-sufficient and reduce the need to travel long distances for basic necessities like groceries or recreation, the Connect the Neighborhoods scenario makes sense.

We have to do something

By 2040, projections say DC will around 800,000 residents one-third more than today. The region as a whole will add 2 million new residents, also about a third increase.

Projected population growth (left) and job growth (right). Images from DDOT.

The roads, rails, and bike paths will all need to accommodate more people safely, without relying on more physical space, and that's one of the central challenges this plan seeks to address. How will we move ourselves around, with a third more people everywhere?

The District is the 7th most walkable city, according to Walk Score, yet also has the most pedestrian fatalities per capita among major cities, and 46% of respondents in a 2009 DDOT survey complained that unsafe street crossings made it difficult from them to walk to places they want to go.

DDOT is committed to expanding transit, bicycling, and walking options. Mayor Gray's sustainability plan sets goals for 75% of trips to use these modes, which fit in more people per lane mile. At the same time, some people will continue to need to drive. Performance parking, car sharing, and possibly a future driverless car can reduce parking pressures as the number of people grows.

How should the District focus its transportation to meet the needs of the future? How should it balance getting people in and out of the core versus connecting neighborhoods? What do you think?

65 comments

Breakfast links: Stereotypes

Tue, 18 Jun 2013 08:53:00 EDT

by David Alpert

Photo by Michael Hänsch on Flickr.

"Gentrifiers" aren't all white: A new report identifies "gentrifying" neighborhoods based on trends in property values. New residents are more affluent and often younger, but in several neighborhoods, they're same race as longtime residents. (WBJ)

Bad apples lead to viral videos: If you're biking (or driving or walking), don't be a jerk. At the DC Bike Party, a few people rode unsafely and almost hit many pedestrians. One of them got hit by a taxi while running a red light. (DCist)

Simmons: Roads not rights: Deborah Simmons thinks DC shouldn't spend $1 million to promote statehood until it spends billions on new road infrastructure that would speed up the commute for some people from Maryland. (Wash. Times)

Primary will stay a joke: Muriel Bowser, David Catania, and Mary Cheh aren't willing to move the 2014 primary later than April 1. That date keeps the voting out of budget season, but could mean 9-month lame ducks if someone loses a reelection bid. (Post)

Food trucks get compromise: The DC Council may have reached a compromise on food truck regulations, which would still create defined vending zones, but let trucks operate more freely near the zones, and along narrower sidewalks. (WBJ)

Bag fee just for food?: Montgomery County may exempt non-food stores from the 5¢ bag fee (similar to what DC already does). That would exclude 89% of retailers and cut revenues from the fee by about 38%. (WBJ)

Chevy Chase Lake gets changes: Nancy Floreen and George Leventhal relax rigid congestion-based rules for development at Chevy Chase Lake, though in a nod to resident opposition, they also lower some allowable building heights. (WAMU)

Make the MBT safer: Residents along the Metropolitan Branch Trail (and Tommy Wells and Kenyan McDuffie) walk the trail together to raise awareness of safety issues and encourage people to keep using the trail. (Post)

Talk bike lanes, safe streets: There's a public meeting about Florida Avenue NE Wednesday night at Gallaudet (WashCycle) ... ANC 3D will talk New Mexico Avenue bike lanes on Monday, June 24. (Ward3DC)

And...: DC students couldn't use their transit passes Monday. (Post) ... Bethesda condos may include an art incubator. (BethesdaNow) ... An old Kozmo.com logo reappears in demolition. (DCist) ... There's a streetcar crossing sign in DC. (BeyondDC)

Have a tip for the links? Submit it here.

68 comments

Endless zoning update delay hurts homeowners

Mon, 17 Jun 2013 14:33:00 EDT

by David Alpert

Remember DC's zoning update? The source of massive public debate last year, and public hearings way back in 2008? It's still slowly grinding along, but the long delays even on less controversial provisions are making life difficult for actual homeowners today.

Carriage houses in Naylor Court. Photo by Mr. T in DC on Flickr.

A friend and her husband recently bought a DC row house for them and their two children. The row house has 2 stories plus a basement. In the rear is a 2-story carriage house, which a previous owner renovated into a separate apartment. However, it doesn't have the permits to be a legal unit.

This friend would like to rent out the carriage house. Nothing would change on the outside of the building. The adjacent houses also have garages or carriage houses on this alley, and the only windows face the alley or face the main property.

Unfortunately, DC's zoning laws make this difficult.

This house is in an R-4 zone, which encompasses many of the moderate density row house neighborhoods like Shaw, Bloomingdale, Petworth, Capitol Hill, and Trinidad. (It's the purple in the large map about halfway down this post). In an R-4, it's totally legal to make a house into 2 units, as long as both are inside the main building. But to use an existing accessory building like a garage requires a variance.

As we discussed in the context of theaters in residential zones on Friday, a variance is actually very difficult to get. There has to be some "exceptional" condition of the property. Sometimes DC's Board of Zoning Adjustment stretches pretty far to find exceptional conditions when neighbors don't object, but they can't always; in one case, a property owner wanted to build a garage on the alley to match the garages for every other property on the same alley. Nobody objected, but the board couldn't find an "exceptional" condition because that lot was exactly the same as every other lot (only without a garage).

This friend can try to get a variance, which would mean hiring zoning lawyers and a process lasting the better part of a year. Or, she and her husband can substantially renovate the house to make the basement a separate unit instead, at great expense. They might be able to maneuver around the zoning laws by somehow connecting the carriage house to the main house with a walkway, so it no longer counts as a separate building.

Or, instead of any of these undesirable and expensive approaches, DC could just pass its zoning update already. One of the proposals for row house areas would allow the legal 2nd unit to go in an accessory building, like a garage. The Zoning Commission, the federal-local hybrid board that decides the zoning in DC, decided on this and other recommendations on June 8, 2009, so we've just passed the 4-year anniversary of when they actually ruled on these proposals.

At the time, the plan was for the Office of Planning (OP) to go and write detailed text based on the Zoning Commission's guidance. The head of the project, Travis Parker, then got a job running a planning department in Colorado, and the team lost another member, Michael Guilioni, slowing the whole process. Opponents of the more controversial pieces of the update then asked for more delays, more public meetings, more task force meetings, and more process.

It's time to move forward on the zoning update. OP deputy director Jennifer Steingasser told the Dupont Circle ANC that they've recently shown the latest set of drafts to their task force, a group of residents from stakeholder groups and various wards. After that, it's time to bring the drafts to the Zoning Commission for the final phase: a formal "setdown" and formal hearings where residents can make their case for or against the proposals.

Even small tweaks that will fix pervasive problems with the zoning code have been stuck in limbo for over 5 years because this process is taking so long. It's time to bring the best draft to the Zoning Commission, have hearings, and approve the zoning update so that homeowners like these, and many others around the city, don't have to keep waiting to better enjoy and afford their properties.

40 comments

Breakfast links: Influence

Mon, 17 Jun 2013 08:51:00 EDT

by David Alpert

Photo by Jeff Youngstrom on Flickr.

There is a (little) bike lobby: Dorothy Rabinowitz called the bicyle lobby "all-powerful," and it's not, but some are trying to lobby for bicycling. They're just way smaller than the auto lobby. (Politico)

Is the council too powerful?: US Attorney Ron Machen thinks the DC Council needs to curb its influence over things that invite bribery, but several councilmembers say it's just the same as everyday "constituent service." (Post)

Safeway expands, goes mixed-use: Facing competition from many more grocery chains, longtime area stalwart Safeway is looking to add more stores and renovate existing ones, often with housing on top. (Post)

Fence blocks the way: A WJLA news van "almost backed over" a resident cutting through a Rosslyn parking lot. In response, the owner has put up a fence to block a walkway, forcing residents to walk the long way around in poor lighting. (ArlNow)

No jail for Raquel Nelson: Raquel Nelson, the Atlanta woman convicted of vehicular homicide when her son ran into a street and got killed by a driver, is free: prosecutors finally relented and let her plead to jaywalking. But problems with safety crossing our streets, and bad laws, persist. (T4A)

Fraud with disability parking : At least 17 DC workers have been abusing disabled parking placards, such as non-disabled people using another's placard. (Examiner)

Education elements: Fairfax schools might start later to better match teens' circadian rhythms. (WAMU) ... Engineers studied sinkholes at Garrison Elementary, but DC hasn't paid them. (Borderstan) ... Arlington won't get a new law school. (ArlNow)

House may scrap Ike design: A House committee wants to start over with a new design for the Eisenhower Memorial. The Eisenhower family has fiercely lobbied against Frank Gehry's design. (Examiner)

And...: We'll miss JDLand (and thoughts are with JD's family). ... A conservative former Congressman wants his colleagues to go see DC's black neighborhoods. (DCist) ... Prince William residents discover VDOT's planning processes are shams. (Potomac Local)

Have a tip for the links? Submit it here.

43 comments

Theaters can't find homes? Fix the zoning

Fri, 14 Jun 2013 13:16:00 EDT

by David Alpert

Smaller theaters that don't own buildings of their own are having trouble finding places to rent. Can DC's zoning update help fix this?

Great spot for a theater. Photo by NCinDC on Flickr.

Nelson Pressley writes in the Post about numerous theater troupes which have outgrown their existing spaces, or are losing their spaces. With heavy demand for office and residential space in DC, there aren't a lot of affordable places to rent that can fit the performing arts.

It would make perfect sense for the arts to expand east of the Anacostia River and to other underserved parts of DC where space is cheaper. An arts space, the Anacostia Playhouse, is even working to open in Anacostia, though it's faced delays including some from parking minimums.

Pressley talks about a few groups which found unconventional spaces, like Spooky Action Theater, which uses a church basement on 16th Street in Dupont. But Spooky Action had to seek a zoning variance to keep performing in the church basement, which is very difficult to get; DC's Office of Planning could change this to an easier "special exception" to foster more performing arts.

Arts performances are not a by-right use in a residential area or in a religious building in a residential area. A variance, however, sets high hurdles for anyone seeking one; you have to prove that not getting the variance presents "exceptional practical difficulties or exceptional and undue hardship" on the property owner.

Neighbors had some concerns about where audience members would congregate before shows and during intermission, but ultimately the theater did get its variance with support from the Dupont Circle ANC. The theater and church agreed not to allow any audience members to use the rear alley entrance of the church, so that any noise would be on 16th Street rather than near the rear neighbors' houses.

In its report, the DC Office of Planning said that it couldn't conclude that the need for a theater rose to the level of "exceptional practical difficulties or exceptional and undue hardship," but the Board of Zoning Adjustment ultimately decided that since the church is having financial struggles, its need to rent out its basement is exceptional enough.

But why should this be necessary? If another church, perhaps one in strong financial shape, wants to rent out a basement to the performing arts, and if they can ensure it doesn't unduly harm neighbors, isn't this a win-win for everyone? Unfortunately, the zoning rules make such a beneficial arrangement extremely difficult.

The DC Office of Planning could solve this problem by simply switching performing arts to a "special exception" standard, which is much lower. Under a special exception, the zoning board simply must determine that a use doesn't harm the public good, but there need not be some "exceptional" circumstance. For example, you can locate a home daycare in a residential zone, but have to get a special exception. The same could apply to a theater.

I live in a residential zone, and there happens to be a theater on my own block. It's a great asset, not a detriment. Theaters won't be able to afford to rent spaces in busy commercial zones when they're competing with restaurants and furniture stores. We can let them use other spaces nearby, spaces not open to retailers, and help the arts while enriching our neighborhoods with fun and culture.

(And go see a show at Spooky Action, or my neighbor the Keegan, or the Studio, Woolly Mammoth, or any of the other great theater groups in DC that put on interesting plays that are new and/or low-cost. There's a lot more to arts besides the Kennedy Center and Shakespeare!)

26 comments

What is WMATA's long-range financial plan?

Wed, 12 Jun 2013 12:21:00 EDT

by David Alpert

The Washington Post, several bloggers, and many Metro riders have been hammering WMATA recently for being so opaque about its timetable for Metro Forward repairs. Besides leveling with riders about how long repairs are going to take, WMATA could build confidence by also being more forthcoming about how much money it will need in the long run.

Photo by Paul L on Flickr.

The constant refrain from CEO Richard Sarles about maintenance is, "it'll be done when it's done." As Dan Malouff wrote yesterday, that isn't good enough. "The more confident we are that this painful time will end someday, the better we can support Metro in the meantime," he said.

The same questions apply to WMATA's budget. Year after year, we find out that there's a shortfall, or maybe not; a fare hike has to go into effect, or maybe not. The budget precipitates a crisis where local jurisdictions have to come up with money or service cuts have to take effect.

Last April, I suggested a long-range financial and capital plan for Metro with specific information:

Until 20XX, Metro will be in "catch-up mode." After that, they'll be in "keep it working" mode.
During catch-up mode, Metro needs $x million in capital funds per year, increasing at a rate of x% per year. After that, they'll need $y million in keep it working mode (less than in catch-up mode).
If we can still afford the catch-up mode funding once Metro reaches a state of good repair, then we can start using the surplus to pay for some projects to deal with the high passenger loads that there will be by this time, like adding physical walkways between Metro Center and Gallery Place, new entrances at busy stations like Foggy Bottom, or new lines or tracks in the core.
If Metro doesn't get enough money in catch-up mode, then that mode will have to last longer. If it doesn't get enough in keep it working mode, then it may have to go back into catch-up mode.
In keep it working mode, to maintain the existing service, given wages, pensions, fuel, health care, and so on, Metro will have to increase its budget by z% each year. A certain percentage of that can come from riders, while jurisdictions should plan on increasing their Metro contributions by the remaining amount necessary to reach the z% per year.
In good years, Metro will use the extra money to top up its rainy day fund; in bad years, it'll spend money from that fund.

From talking to some WMATA employees, my understanding is that many but not all top leaders want to be able to project like this. Some of the information about asset lifecycles they have, while some they hope to collect. It's less clear how much consensus there is over how deeply to share the information with the public.

Along with revealing how much money the agency needs, there needs to be transparency about what we get for it. If the region keeps up funding maintenance, then we need to be able to know that, indeed, the system is maintaining a state of good repair. It's a two-way street: a good system will cost this much, but then residents can know they got a good system out of the deal.

More long-term budget information will also help leaders and riders know whether the pension obligations and other retirement benefits are unsustainable over the long run. If they are, we need to start finding ways now to keep paying good workers a living wage and ensuring they have health care, but with a package that WMATA and the region can keep affording for decades to come.

Without long-term budgeting, it's always too easy to shortchange the present. It's easy to skip out on keeping up state of good repair during an economic downturn, and then not make up the funds during a boom. Before 2008, WMATA's pension funds rose in value, so the agency didn't salt as much money away; that ultimately let jurisdictions spend less. Then, the funds dropped, and it had to come up with more money during the toughest times.

It's always easier to get through the immediate problems and push the long-term questions out of mind until they're imminent crises. Certainly that's what we do with road projects, too—as Strong Towns' Chuck Marohn keeps chronicling, few jurisdictions really plan for the lifecycle replacement costs of the new road infrastructure from a new subdivision. Someone else will deal with it later.

Metro took a big step forward by releasing its long-term vision for capital projects, like upgrading to 8-car trains and relieving the Rosslyn bottleneck. Now we know how much those should cost, and local governments can start thinking about how to pay for it. Now, we need the equivalent for the Metro Forward maintenance plan and the operating costs for all services. We need better data to make fully informed decisions.

The Metrorail system is one of our region's greatest assets. We have to keep it working for the long term. Riders need confidence that we will get past the immediate problems and avoid getting into this kind of hole again. Otherwise, even if Metro does regain rider confidence, it'll always be on the precipice of more crises that squander it again.

23 comments

Breakfast links: Off to the races

Wed, 12 Jun 2013 08:53:00 EDT

by David Alpert

Photo by Wolfram Burner on Flickr.

Who won: Ralph Northam and Mark Herring won the Democratic nominations for Lieutenant Governor and Attorney General in Virginia, while 2 Republican legislators who supported the gas tax shift lost to primary challengers. (Post)

Who's running, leaving: Ike Leggett will run for another term as Montgomery County Executive. (WTOP) ... DC State Superintendent of Education Hosanna Mahaley Jones is resigning because of her husband's health. (WAMU)

Struck around the region: A charter bus driver hit a cyclist at 4th and Mass, NW this morning. (PoPville) ... A tree fell on a teenager while biking in Montgomery County during Monday's storm. (WJLA) ... A driver killed a highway worker putting out cones in Howard County. (WTOP) ... A police officer hit a pedestrian on Fairfax's Richmond Highway. (Post) ... Some people severely beat a cyclist on the Metropolitan Branch Trail. (ToT)

Church wants to move bike lane: The church at 14th and Corcoran NW wants some change to the bike lane on 14th Street so people can double park for funeral processions. The story isn't clear about what they want to change. (Borderstan)

Slow down in Arlington: Arlington might lower speed limits to 25 mph on parts of Wilson and Clarendon Boulevards with dense development. (Sun Gazette)

Takoma TOD plan 2.0: After residents blocked a proposal for townhouses at the Takoma Metro years ago, there's a new development plan: more green space, and no townhouses, but apartments and more of them. Some residents are gearing up to fight this plan too. (Voice, RPUS)

Is artificial turf hazardous?: Montgomery County plans to put synthetic turf on a Gaithersburg field, but residents worried about the material say it gets too hot, and the chemicals in recycled tires can pose health and environmental hazards. (Gazette)

Fundrise: investment or donation?: Financial advisors say investing in local real estate with crowdfunding sites like Fundrise is a bad investment, but others say making money isn't the main point for many of those who will contribute. (Post, Atlantic Cities)

On the calendar: I'm talking about Fairfax transportation at a panel event tonight in Merrifield, 7:30-9:30. (Chairman Bulova) ... The final moveDC workshop is tomorrow in Georgetown. (DDOT) ... ANCs will talk bike lanes around H Street on Monday. (WABA)

Have a tip for the links? Submit it here.

74 comments

Dan Reed debates BRT opponents

Tue, 11 Jun 2013 10:15:00 EDT

by David Alpert

Greater Greater Washington staff editor Dan Reed appeared on Fox 5 to talk about Montgomery County's BRT plans along with opponent Paula Bienenfeld. Visually, even just the scene on set brings into sharp relief the changes the county is undergoing.

Image from Fox 5. Click to view segment.

The segment, starting with the anchor's introduction, seems to frame the issue around what this means for drivers. Reed talks about how BRT will move more people, and even those who don't ride the bus will benefit.

Bienenfeld, meanwhile, reads out the standard playbook of opposition. "We're not opposed to public transit," she assures everyone, before casting everything associated with transit as bad, such as devoting any space to bus stops. She also claims that having to cross a bus lane is unsafe for children. Reed later points out that crossing the regular car roadways is far more dangerous.

Bienenfeld criticizes the plan for not including things like Google self-driving cars, signalization, and "personal electric vehicles." Montgomery County already times its signals to move the most cars, even at the expense of those children walking and crossing the street, and none of the other options could move more people in fixed space.

Primarily, though, her objection is that "there was no public input" into the plan, which was created through "secret behind-the-scenes deals that have been cut." This seems astounding, given that a task force worked for a long time to create a plan, then released that plan a full year ago. Since then, county officials have refined and, in many cases, scaled back the plan, each time in full view of the public.

As Reed pointed out in the segment, this is still only a draft plan, with many more hearings yet to come. Unfortunately, people argue that there hasn't been enough input or a good enough public process almost no matter how long or short the public process actually is. This creates a "boy who cried wolf" effect for those times when government agencies really do try to ram a plan through with minimal public comment. The BRT plan is, at least thus far, not one of those cases.

One other argument from Bienenfeld rings particularly hollow: she argues that the plans "cram all the bus routes downcounty into underserved areas and lower-income, avoiding the wealthier parts of the county." Yet the bus routes include Wisconsin Avenue, which passes through some of the county's most affluent communities; most of the opposition has come from the neighborhoods between Bethesda and Friendship Heights.

41 comments