Posts from March 2011

Other cuts include shortening late-night hours on the McPherson Square-Woodley Park route and consolidating bus stops on the Georgetown-Union Station route to create a more limited-stop service like most of the other routes.

Cuts and adjustments

The fare increases and immediate cuts, minus the increase in hours for Union Station represent a savings of about $3.7 million per year. Those changes include:

Raise the fare to $2.00 cash/$1.50 SmarTrip. This will raise revenue and also fix the problem where the Circulator serves wealthier areas while costing less than buses going to less afflient neighborhoods. Business groups worry that this will substantially cut ridership. I've endorsed raising the fare.

Eliminate the Mall loop. This seasonal route never got much ridership compared to other routes. The Park Service wouldn't let it use internal Mall roads or put it on signs, meaning many tourists didn't know about it as a transportation option. DC would save money by cutting it until the Park Service wants to really work together to provide transportation in the area.

Suspend the Downtown-Convention Center route. This has the highest subsidy per rider and lowest farebox recovery (12%) of any of the routes besides the Mall loop. The Green and Yellow Line service parallels it for most of the length, as do some Metrobuses.

However, this route also reaches some areas with substantial imminent development, like the O Street Market on the northern end and the Southwest Waterfront development on the south. DDOT is proposing to suspend it until the Waterfront development really gets going and the new Mall routes are created (see below), at which point they anticipate it performing better.

Cut late-night hours on Woodley Park-Adams Morgan-McPherson Square. This route currently ends at 3:30 am on weekends, while the Georgetown-Union Station and Rosslyn-Georgetown-Dupont routes end at 2 am. DDOT says the ridership is very low during this time. The hours of this route would now match those: 7 am-midnight Sunday-Thursday, 7 am-2 am Friday and Saturday.

Consolidate stops on the Georgetown-Union Station route. Current stops are very close together, and the Circulator has more recently moved toward being more of a limited-stop service. One question is whether this will actually increase speed or not on the congested K and M Street segments.

Extend hours on Union Station-Navy Yard. This route now ends at 7 pm except Nationals game days and doesn't run at all on weekends, cutting down its utility and making it hard for people to depend on it all the time as they can other routes. This route would now end at 9 pm, later on game days, and 15 hours of service (not specified in the report) on weekends. It would still have shorter hours than other routes, but far better hours than today.

Add accessibility features to existing vehicles for ADA compliance. All Circulator buses would get verbal announcements of stops for those with vision impairments, and digital signs in the buses would provide a visual indication of the next stop for those with hearing disabilities.

Proposed future Circulator routes. Phase 1 routes are in orange.

New routes

DDOT has also created short- and long-term plans for Circulator expansion to all parts of DC. The immediate "phase 1" improvements include some that DDOT could implement right away using the vehicles and money freed up from the cuts, if the Mayor's budget doesn't cut the overall level of Circulator funding.

East of the River: Extend the Union Station-Navy Yard route across the South Capitol Street bridge to Anacostia, Skyland, and the Giant in Ward 8. This is DDOT's highest priority route, partly because of the strong political interest in expanding the Circulator east of the river, but also because these growing areas could benefit from new limited-stop bus service.

In addition, DDOT would reroute this line to use 2nd Street NE/SE between Union Station and Pennsylvania Avenue instead of the current circuitous path along Louisiana Ave NW, Constitution, and 1st Street to get around Capitol security barriers.

Dupont to Howard: Extend the Rosslyn-Georgetown-Dupont route up 18th Street and across U to the U Street corridor and Howard University. This would connect several activity centers which are close to each other but lack an easy transit connection.

Replace the Mall loop with two new replacement routes. One would go from Georgetown to Union Station via the north side of the Mall (Jefferson Dr.) and one from Arlington Cemetery to Union Station via the south side (Madison Dr.) They have been working with the Park Service to design these routes. DDOT wants to run this in a way that's revenue-neutral for DC residents, whether through payments from the Park Service, higher fares, or other revenue sources.

Resume the north-south route as development picks up on the Waterfront and the O Street Market area. Also, when new Mall routes are created, this route will be valuable to get people between the Mall and Metro stations, downtown restaurants, and other destinations.

Connect to NoMA by extending the Union Station-Navy Yard-(East of the River) or Georgetown-Union Station routes up to NoMA and the New York Avenue Metro. This would link in another major growing activity center using the Circulator network.

Add a northwest-southeast route from Dupont, across the Mall, to the Waterfront and Navy Yard. This would add another, farther west link to the Mall routes so Mall visitors could connect to nearby major destinations. Right now, the western side of the Mall, such as the World War II Memorial and Jefferson Memorial are a long hike from Metro stations and hotels in the Golden Triangle or Southwest.

Future extensions include connections between Wards 7 and 8, a route on H Street and one on Florida Avenue where the current 90s buses run, a crosstown route from Brookland to Woodley Park and then to Tenleytown, and another crosstown route from Tenleytown and Friendship Heights along Military Road to Georgia Avenue and Silver Spring.

All of the recommendations come from a streetcar study DDOT conducted, which included several community meetings to hear ideas for routes, an analysis of potential corridors and upcoming economic development, and studies of operating costs and potential revenue.

Update: The original version of this post inadvertently omitted the 2nd Street reroute for the Union Station-Navy Yard line. It's been added.

In 2005, Clarksburg residents discovered a string of site plan violations that led to the appointment of an ombudswoman and the resignation of the Planning Board chairman.

Clarksburg Town Center still doesn't have its Town Center retail district, and there's a new working group to help figure out who will pay for the roads and parks in the parts of Clarksburg that have already been built.

Nonetheless, some 14,000 people now live in Clarksburg, and they need services nearby. Daycare is an obvious priority among these services, and so a planned day care center and after school program, at the intersection of MD 355 and West Old Baltimore Road, just north of Germantown, is welcome.

Unfortunately, it might not get built, due to the recent Planning Board decision which effectively prioritizes the needs of future Clarksburg residents for wider roads over the needs of current Clarksburg residents for nearby day care.

The reason for this backward logic is the Local Area Transportation Review (LATR) part of Montgomery County Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance (APFO). The LATR is based on "critical lane volume" (CLV), a measure of the number of vehicles moving through an intersection's through or left-turn lanes in an hour.

The logic of the Planning Board's decision goes like this:

1. The Planning Board has already approved a lot of new housing in the area. (The Planning Board staff report does not name the approved developments, but they probably include Miller & Smith's "Gallery Park" and Winchester Homes's first development at Cabin Branch.)

2. When this housing has been built and people move in, they will drive through the intersection next to the site of the proposed day care.

3. When they drive through the intersection, it will become unacceptably congested.

4. Therefore, if the day care wants to operate at capacity, it needs to "improve" (i.e., widen) the intersection to account for one and a half times the number of car trips the day care will generate. The widening is to consist of three turn lanes: a southbound right-turn lane on MD 355, a northbound left-turn lane on MD 355, and an eastbound right-turn lane on West Old Baltimore Road. And it may cost $360,000.

Ross Flax, the owner of the day care, points out that day care providers are not experts in road construction and that the day care will account for only 20% of the total additional trips the day care, plus the approved but unbuilt developments, will generate. He has therefore offered to put 20% of the costs ($72,000) in escrow to fund later construction.

But the LATR guidelines say that "improvements" must be "permitted and bonded, under construction, or under contract for construction" before building permits can be issued. Therefore, the day care must pay the whole cost, now. Miller & Smith and Winchester Homes will pay their shares back to the day care later, when they begin building.

However, the day care cannot afford the whole $360,000, Flax has told the Gazette. And operating at half capacity, as would be allowed without the turn lanes, may not be economical. As a result, it is "likely" that he won't open the day care at all unless the Planning Board reconsiders the decision.

In short, the Planning Board first approved large housing developments, whose residents must drive everywhere. Then, they approved more large housing developments, whose future residents will also have to drive everywhere. And now they're requiring a day care, which is intended to serve the current residents, to pay for the wider roads all those extra cars will need.

Memo to the Planning Board: There must be a better plan.

View alternative: 1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10  
View larger version (PDF)

DDOT has enumerated the advantages and disadvantages, along with the costs and specific challenges for each, in this table.

Running streetcar tracks along MLK Avenue can bring much needed economic activity to the main commercial corridor in Anacostia. However, MLK Avenue is narrow and some residents worry that adding streetcar tracks could create additional traffic congestion.

A number of businesses along MLK lack rear access, and residents have concerns that the streetcar will impede both commercial deliveries and customer parking. Eric Fidler discussed these and related issues in a previous post about DDOT's first public meeting on the project in January.

Running the streetcar east of MLK Avenue through residential neighborhoods along 13th or 14th Street could bring new development there, but those streets are similarly narrow. Jay Lee, chairman of ANC 8D, said Ward 8 has the highest number of children in the city, and argued that running the streetcar down residential streets could be dangerous during both construction and operation.

On the west side of MLK Avenue, the streetcar could use the existing CSX right-of-way and bring new development to Poplar Point. Many residents supported this route because it would keep the streetcar off of MLK and would reduce the footprint of the streetcar tracks.

While some residents support the project under certain alignments, others oppose the project entirely. In addition to traffic and parking concerns, there was a palpable sense at the meeting that the streetcar is an unnecessary expense and will only benefit new residents.

Those skeptics include Councilmember Marion Barry, who announced that he doesn't want the streetcar extended into the neighborhood from its starter segment to Barry Farm and South Capitol Street.

Some residents articulated fears that the streetcar will bring wealthier, white residents to Anacostia, ultimately displacing folks currently living in the community. Others believe the streetcar will only serve riders from other parts of the District or commuters from Maryland. They have doubts that the streetcar will provide any new value to the existing community.

Since the streetcar won't yet connect to H Street-Benning Road and even the larger system will be confined to DC, it's unlikely that many commuters from Prince George's County would incorporate the streetcar into their daily travels.

However, future extensions of the streetcar will serve the 14,000 new jobs expected to come from the new Homeland Security headquarters just to the south, ultimately connecting them with local businesses. Also, bringing more people to Anacostia could result in more local investment and a higher quality of life in Ward 8.

It was beneficial that residents were able to see many potential routes at Saturday's meeting, but DDOT still has a big task ahead if it wants to convince residents of the potential benefits of the streetcar, including increased mobility and attracting economic development.

Many of those opposed feel the streetcar will come regardless of their opposition and they cannot envision future development in places like Poplar Point. Education and public trust are critical to the success of the project.

Thus Washington's network is relatively new: Extensions continue to open every few years; a major new line running to and beyond Dulles Airport, in fact, is in construction.

This means that many of the changes that have been hypothesized to accompany heavy rail service, like densification, may not have yet appeared. Nonetheless, in some places, such as along the Rosslyn-Ballston Corridor in Arlington County, Virginia, significant urban redevelopment has occurred. Similarly, in cities like Charlotte, Denver, and Minneapolis, major new construction has begun after the completion of light rail lines.

Just how widespread are these effects? Have similar changes happened everywhere where new Metro stations have opened in the Washington region?

To examine this question, I have delved into recently released Census 2010 data to consider what has changed since 2000. By considering the alterations in development patterns near stations that opened about ten years ago, we can better understand what has occurred.

On first evaluation, there is no clear connection between the opening of a new station and increased construction—at least on a ten-year timeline.

Between 1997 and 2001, nine Metro stations opened, two of which were in the heart of the city on the Green Line (Columbia Heights and Georgia Avenue) and the rest of which were at the termini of the Red (Glenmont), Blue (Franconia-Springfield), and Green Lines (Congress Heights, Southern Avenue, Naylor Road, Suitland, and Branch Avenue).

Compared to their host jurisdictions, only three of the nine stations saw higher growth in adjacent Census tracts: Columbia Heights, Franconia-Springfield, and Branch Avenue. In the areas around these stations, densification was significant, promoting the theory that transit can be an effective tool for urban regeneration and growth.

These changes were particularly interesting at Columbia Heights, where an already pretty dense neighborhood only became more so thanks to rapid replacement of low-lying building stock with taller buildings. Around the other two stops, largely vacant land was replaced with new construction.

Around two other stations—Georgia Avenue and Glenmont—growth was also positive, but it was slower than in Washington and Montgomery County, respectively.

Finally, four of the studied stations saw a decrease in population in the surrounding Census tracts. Each station is on the southeastern branch of the Green Line, which runs through arguably the region's weakest area from an economic perspective. The presence of transit did not appear to be of any help here: Though Washington and Prince George's County saw population growth between 2000 and 2010, the specific neighborhoods around these stations did not.

Changes appear to be quite context-dependent. The population of the area around the Columbia Heights station expanded significantly, likely not only because of the presence of Metro, but also because of a growing interest nationwide in living in urban cores. On the other hand, the poor attractiveness of Prince George's County, just east of the District of Columbia, likely reduced developer interest in building around stations there.

This analysis indicates that the presence of a transit station cannot provide alone for the kind of urban redevelopment planners often hope to produce when they allocate funds to new rail lines. This does not mean that the opening of the new Metro stations was not an important element of regional growth in Washington, but rather that that infrastructure in itself is not enough to encourage developer interest. In the case of many of these stations, land was not available, zoning was not free enough, and the neighborhoods were not attractive enough to see substantial change, at least over the past ten years.

Transit systems like the Washington Metro are very expensive to construct, so public authorities must make a greater effort to coordinate planning efforts to allow for the creation of more transit-oriented districts to take advantage of such investments.

I would like to note several important caveats: The use of Census tract data in this analysis was meant to provide a neighborhood-level glimpse into development changes. Residents (or potential residents) are likely to see Metro stations as assets, even if their homes are not in immediate proximity. Yet development changes are likely to be unusually affected by that proximity: It may be useful to reconsider these questions at the block level. It is possible, for instance, that the areas directly adjacent to the southeast Green Line stations did see growth, even when surrounding neighborhoods did not.

Cross-posted at The Transport Politic.

DDOT already puts in angled parking in DC, but without a formal process. Requests usually come from Business Improvement Districts (BIDs), churches, ANCs, council­members, the Mayor's office, or citizens. The requests go to DDOT's Ward Planner, the Parking Specialist, or the Curbside Specialist. Several divisions discuss the idea based on the need, construction or other plans already in place, and, of course, traffic counts.

For businesses without a BID, this bills to establish a formal process could be helpful. For areas where double parking for churches often happens anyway, this might be a way to make some peace between neighbors and churches. If these requests are common, DDOT should have a formal policy.

When DDOT turns down requests, people usually aren't satisfied. They go higher, to the Council or the Mayor, and the order comes down to put it in. Given that, why would DDOT ever say no to diagonal parking? Is DDOT anti-business? Is DDOT anti-church? Here are a couple of reasons.

1. The street's not wide enough. Parallel parking requires 7-9 feet, travel lanes are 10-12, and bike lanes are 5. Angled parking, depending on whether the angle is 45, 60, or 90, consumes 16-20 feet. Unless there's an travel lane that isn't needed, angled parking isn't possible.

2. The space is already being used. What's occupying the space today? If vehicle counts are high enough, then the answer is traffic. If not, there might be a bike lane or a sidewalk widening planned. To install permanent diagonal parking, the city needs to decide if enough space can be taken out of the transportation network permanently during the week. This is not an easy decision. Once angled parking is installed, an act of Congress seems to be the only way to undo it.

On Sundays, traffic is likely not an issue. While at DDOT, planners recognized that permanent diagonal parking often kills the possibility for bike lanes on certain blocks (11th ST NW between Vermont and Q Streets, for example). Does it matter if the bike lanes are blocked on Sundays, since there's so little traffic anyway? Can people on bikes simply use the travel lane? This might not be problematic on Sundays, but could be slippery slope to losing the integrity of bike lanes.

Now the broader question: Do we want more parking? It has generally been treated as good. But what else comes with more parking?

More traffic. It's a fact (proven over and over and over) that more parking creates more traffic. But in a retail area that seems barren, isn't more traffic a good thing? Maybe, but so is a good streetscape to make people want to shop there in the first place.

Diagonal parking has a traffic calming effect, but so to other techniques. After the protected bike lanes on 15th Street NW were installed, the number of vehicles driving over 20 mph over the speed limit decreased from 147 a day to 3 (a 98% reduction). Calmer traffic means people are driving slower, looking around more at businesses, and watching for cars exiting spaces. But it's just one tool in the traffic calming toolbox.

Diagonal parking is just one way to address parking shortages. There are many ways to manage parking, from building a garage to alternating pricing and time limits at meters. A bill that calls out a single solution to an often complicated problem ties the hands of experts whose job it is to keep up with innovations and to understand limits of each one.

More parking means businesses tend to market to people driving in, not neighbors. When residents can walk, bike, take the bus or a taxi to businesses nearby, businesses will cater to them. But when people can drive to your neighborhood restaurant, the restaurant will start giving them what they want, not what you want.

That means more emphasis on parking and valets, and less on sidewalks, trees, benches, bike racks, and bike lanes. While more parking for businesses and churches seems like a good way to deal with struggling businesses and too many people driving in on Sundays, it enforces the idea that these aren't really for neighbors.

More parking hurts the taxicab industry. Taxis are demand-responsive, on-demand transit. But the taxi system works best without congestion and when people aren't driving themselves. Taxis are also a great way to get home from bars at 2am, when Metro is infrequent and people do not want to be driving.

Are Councilmember Thomas' bills necessary? Do we need more permanent parking? If the honest intent of these bills is to issue procedures, and not simply to force DDOT to approve more diagonal parking, then they could have some benefit, but may not be necessary. But let us not forget that more parking often comes at the price of other aspects of city life we enjoy.

That's highly unfortunate, given that the problem of unorganized people standing around the parking lot persists today. The center would have brought, among other goals, "An organized system linking contractors and individuals seeking work from contractors at the Home Depot site."

Given the rumors we've heard of Lowe's sharing the site with Walmart (and the people you can already spot selling bottled water and flowers in the median at New York Ave NE and Bladensburg or Montana), are accommodations being made to give these people a place to look for work with dignity?

It doesn't have to be a palace, but a few resources, including a bathroom and a way to get out of the way of bad weather, would probably go pretty far toward making the day laborer scene more appealing for the stores, customers, and the day laborers.

And there are people who will be against offering any accommodation to day laborers, based on the fact that many are in the United States illegally. While it may be true that many are here illegally, they are also still people, and ignoring the problem will not make fewer day laborers congregate around places where contractors shop. If some accommodation is made for them, it would provide a huge benefit to the customers and neighbors, not just the laborers themselves.

It can be difficult and dangerous to navigate your car around people loitering in a parking lot and unattractive to have dozens of people congregate around the perimeter of the property. We can bury our heads in the sand if we're determined to do so a second time, but it won't make our problems go away.

Councilmember Thomas now chairs the DC Council's Economic Development Committee. He has helped make Walmart's second attempt to open a store in DC much less adversarial than its first. So will Thomas make sure that day laborers are thought of if and when this new development is built? Will he work with the developers to make sure they include shelter and resources for the day laborers who will almost certainly congregate on the premises? Will the developer pay for the center or will the DC government be asked to pay (as it was proposed in 2007, though the funds were never used)?

If you get asked to appear on WAMU, they offer you a free parking pass, which you can print out and bring to the station. Why not also offer a free Metro ride to Tenleytown as another option? Imagine if an organization could send you an email, which you could open up on your mobile phone and which contains a special code your phone would recognize and use to add value to your stored fare?

Michael Perkins has been promoting adding more flexible passes like those used in the Seattle area. WMATA has said they need to wait for upgrades to the fare payment system to be able to consider this. Will the new system allow the Board to consider a wide range of options like Michael's?

In December, WMATA issued an RFP for the next generation of the payment system, and hopes to award a contract this summer.

WMATA got into trouble with the existing Cubic system because any change requires lengthy RFPs, bids, and custom programming that cost lots of money and took years. That limited their options for fare changes that could help riders.

With this new system, it's important to build in the flexibility they would need. The new contract should anticipate many of the possible innovations, and make sure that the vendor can provide those should the Board choose to pursue them. It should also make it relatively inexpensive and relatively quick to make other modifications we don't anticipate today.

Now is a good time for riders to give suggestions of what they'd like to see in the new system, or what issues might arise with features, usability, and more that staff should keep in mind as they pick technology vendors.

If you want to learn about the details of this process and give rider feedback on the decisions being made, come to the RAC's meeting tonight. You don't have to be a RAC member to ask questions or give comments. The meeting will start around 7:00 pm in one of the rooms at the lobby level of WMATA headquarters, 600 5th Street, NW.

Is your CaBi station getting full or empty?: With the weather warming up, there have been huge numbers of people riding Capital Bikeshare. How is Alta holding up keeping stations from being full or empty?

Rhee feared Hardy principal was weeding out poor kids: A new book on Michelle Rhee, The Bee Eater by journalist Richard Whitmire, reports an eyebrow-raising claim: That former Hardy Middle School principal Patrick Pope manipulated the admissions process to reduce the numbers of poor students gaining admission to the school.

Most popular:

How would Dulles's rail compare to European airports?: The Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority board is still trying to decide whether to spend more money to build an underground Silver Line station close to the Dulles terminal, or to instead choose an elevated station near the parking garage.

Animation shows London's bikeshare patterns: Meredith Begin from the DC Bicycle Advisory Council sent around this video animating bike sharing usage in London for one day.

Will the Silver Line produce sprawl like highways do?: Here in the Washington, DC area, our Metro system is expanding with the Silver Line. It's always great to see transit flourishing, and it will be nice to be able to take the Metro all the way to Dulles without switching to the bus.

Ward 2 now too large, wards 7 and 8 too small: The Census has released its DC data which will be used for redistricting. Ward 2 will need to shrink, while wards 7 and 8 will need to grow slightly.

How should DC redraw ANC boundaries?: The US Census Bureau will be releasing detailed data for the District of Columbia this week, which will kick off the decennial process of adjusting DC's wards and, also very importantly, the boundaries for Advisory Neighborhood Commissions (ANCs).

Other posts:

• Weekend video: NJ Transit locomotives on German roads
• Pedestrian safety ads feature damage to cars, not people
• Cyclists: Report bike potholes for Potholepalooza
• DDOT will adjust meter rates, use money for neighborhoods
• Now and not so long ago: Stoupsy's Cafe
• On the calendar: Kojo in McLean, Bloomingdale parking, Prince George's development, Anacostia streetcars
• Bridging the Flickr Pool
• Weekend video: 300 years of fossil fuels