Also on the pollution front:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/7245385/Pollution-the-biggest-killer-on-Britains-roads.html

basically ultra-fine particulate matter passes through the lungs into the blood. ANother reason to ban diesel engines.

by charlie on Feb 16, 2010 9:59 am  

Re: Langley Park.

Tax Increment Financing mechanisms are most often used to finance infrastructure development, but I don't see why the same concept shouldn't be used to capitalize an affordable housing development fund. The owners of land who benefit from investment in transit infrastructure could be required to include affordable housing elements that could be funded by incremental tax revenues.

by jnb on Feb 16, 2010 10:34 am  

JUFJ's forum on the Purple Line and Langley Park is on Wednesday, not today. So you have TWO reasons to come and visit Silver Spring this week!

by dan reed on Feb 16, 2010 10:57 am  

Dan: I thought I explained it was the day after, but I can see that the wording was a little unclear, so I've added an explicit note that it's Wednesday.

by David Alpert on Feb 16, 2010 11:07 am  

It was very nice of the district to plow curb to curb, it was not so nice to push the snow to block previously cleared crosswalks. It was even less nice to pile snow 5 or 6 feet high on the various reservations, specifically around Dupont, that completly eliminate sidewalks.

by nathaniel on Feb 16, 2010 11:12 am  

Regarding the pollution study:

Correlation does not prove causation. The study's abstract (which is the only part available online for free) does not say that they controlled for income. Highway noise and pollution depress property values and so housing near highways is some of the most affordable housing in cities. People who live close to highways are likely to be among the poorest people in any city.

There are many correlations between income and health and those links may in fact be more important that proximity to highways.

I'm not denying that the study is true, but I think it needs closer examination.

by Eric F. on Feb 16, 2010 11:19 am  

@nathaniel,

Again, where do you want the snow to go?

Kudos to the District for hauling away as much snow as possible. I walked over to RFK this weekend and saw a constant stream of dump trucks hauling snow away to dump in the RFK parking lots. I later saw a convoy of empty trucks along Pennsylvania Ave SE, and several front end loaders clearing away the berms from streetcorners and loading the trucks to haul the snow away.

This is a laborious and long-term process. It takes time, and patience is required.

by Alex B. on Feb 16, 2010 11:20 am  

I want the snow to go in dump trucks to RFK, I want the snow not to be piled in front of crosswalks, I want the snow not to go on sidealks in such a manner that it will take a month for it to melt.

I realize it is a labourous process and I think in general the district has done a great job. My complaint here is they made situations regarding sidewalks that were acceptable and made them unacceptable. It is not asking too much to say don't dump big piles of snow in front of the cross walk. In many cases this is what they did. Where for a week there was shoveled areas at a crosswalk, there is now a 5 foot pile of snow.

Also it is never okay to dump snow from the street onto sidewalks in such a manner as to make the sidewalk unusable.

by nathaniel on Feb 16, 2010 11:50 am  

@ Eric F., no longitudinal epidemiologic study will be published in a peer reviewed journal without thoroughly controlling for potential confounders. Below is a link to the full text. Its kind of a cannard to throw out "correlation n.e. causation". Epi studies rely on correlation and indeed in well designed and executed studies correlation does indicate causation. Please read the study before critizing the design, statistical procedures, results and conclusions. This looks to me like a very robust study in which a causation for accelerated athersclerosis is indeed indicated.
http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0009096

by Bianchi on Feb 16, 2010 2:00 pm  

I agree with Nathaniel, and would go even further and say that if the crosswalks and sidewalks are the only place the snow can be put, then it should be left in the street. The government may have a valid purpose in moving snow to the extent it is necessary for emergency vehicles to move, but that does not require plowing every last bit of snow out of the way of the ordinary driver. The government should not burden the rights of people who want to walk by placing obstacles in their path for the sake of people who want to drive. The practice of dumping snow in crosswalks and on sidewalks also effectively deprives walkers of their limited legal right of way -- in some places, walkers have been forced to walk in the street or walk halfway into the middle of the street just to get around the icebergs -- in fact, in some places, you can use up all of your "walk" time just getting to the crosswalk. (Under DC law, a pedestrian has right of way if they begin crossing with a "walk" signal, but it's at best unclear whether we retain that right of way if we're not in the crosswalk. And if you're walking in the street between intersections, you don't (under DC law) have right of way against vehicles -- so anyone forced to walk in the street would technically become a "jaywalker" and possibly jeopardize their legal recourse against a driver who might hit them.)

by Eileen on Feb 16, 2010 5:45 pm  

Regarding people living near freeways- where is the new urbanist critique of the plan to place some 10,000 new residents next to the I-876 Major Deegan Expressway without leaving room to underground/filtrate it?

http://cos-mobile.blogspot.com/search/label/Deegan%20expansion

by Douglas A. Willinger on Feb 17, 2010 4:17 pm  

I-87, not I-876

by Douglas A. Willinger on Feb 17, 2010 4:18 pm