Quickest way to political suicide: reduce the mortgage interest deductions and consider making $100k/household high income.

by RJ on Jan 26, 2012 8:31 am  

Farmland or not I hope Frederick realizes the difference in what people like about the downtown area and try to implement the principles there which make it pleasant. Same thing goes with any area that has a compact core but sprawls outward (fredericksburg, annapolis, alexandria). Those few blocks aren't stuck in time. You can add to the fabric in a smart way.

by canaan on Jan 26, 2012 8:54 am  

This is great news about Andrew Aurbach. He has been a tireless advocate for smart growth and sustainable transportation in Ward 3. The District will be better off because of his service.

by Ben on Jan 26, 2012 9:18 am  

Bad news about Aurbach. Bringing him back, when he was not particularly good the firt time he served on the board, is a mistake. Sure he is a nice guy, and yes he sits on the good side of Urbanist issues, but that does not make this Board a good fit for him. Fail.

by EH on Jan 26, 2012 9:30 am  

@EH, what is the complaint? I don't seem to remember any particular votes or positions that he took last time that would be considered controversial.

by William on Jan 26, 2012 9:33 am  

@William:

The problem is he isn't the NIMBYs' preferred candidate, thus the the NIMBY panic begins. Logic and facts don't have to get in the way of NIMBY rants.

by Ben on Jan 26, 2012 9:39 am  

Because the three trails - Mount Vernon, Custis and W&OD/4-mile run have a general shape with three sides, I and my friends have always called it the "Arlington Triangle" on the assumption that a shape with three sides is called a triangle. A loop, as I understand, has no distinct corners. But, perhaps I need to return to elementary school and relearn my shapes. Of course, if we could somehow put a twist in the trails, we could turn it into Infinite Loop (kind of like Apple's street address).

On a more serious note, the Arlington Triangle/Loop is a huge asset for Arlington and they should continue to build connections to/from it. It is to Arlington and bikes what the Beltway is to Washington and cars.

by Three Sides on Jan 26, 2012 9:43 am  

But the NIMBYs have Nancy Metzger already (who is suing the city on preservation issues). I am truly curious as to what positions or statements EH is considering when making the statement that this nomination is a "Fail."

To be honest, it seems like most of the time, the HPRB simply supports the staff write-ups with, at best, little tweaks. There doesn't appear to be a lot of wiggle room for drastic changes to proposals by the time they go through the historic preservation office and get to the Board.

by William on Jan 26, 2012 9:43 am  

@RJ:

Which is why O'Malley doesn't care - he's term-limited. Though I've heard he has aspirations for higher office...

by Ser Amantio di Nicolao on Jan 26, 2012 9:48 am  

@William - I didn't say he made controversial decisions. I said he wasn't particularly good. His contributions to the Board, in my opinion, (and that is all it is), were lacking. I felt the comments he offered during hearings (when he made any at all) demonstrated a lack of understanding of the scope of the HPRB.

In a City of 600,000 people, I just believe we can do better than recycling him.

by EH on Jan 26, 2012 9:52 am  

@EH

Given the shambles that HPRB is in based on reports here at at @housingcomplex, I think that anyone who is qualified should be nominated. I don't see a lot of archeologists, historians and architectural historians lining up for this.

Can you think of a better name?

Maybe we should be thankful that someone is willing to do it to ensure the city maintains its funding from the National Park Service.

It is always easy to lob "Fail" from the cloak of anonymity at a keyboard.

by William on Jan 26, 2012 10:06 am  

Andrew is a great choice for HPRB. He's smart, dedicated to the city, he gets it. Considering the number of NIMBYs who supported Gray, we should be jumping for joy that he pick Andres.

by Urbanette on Jan 26, 2012 10:14 am  

Real pity about the MBT. I guess my dream of biking the full loop around DC will never come to fruition. By the time the MBT is completed to Silver Spring and connected to the Georgetown Branch Trail, the GBT and CCT will have been torn up and substantially altered for the Purple Line.

by andrew on Jan 26, 2012 10:25 am  

Did MD legalize weed? Because O'Malley must be smoking something. First the proposal to raise the sales tax, now this.

His own Comptroller, the very liberal Peter Franchot from Takoma Park, put it best when he described his opposition to the deduction reduction. Basically, it reduces everyone's property values, making underwater homeowners even farther from break-even, further incenting them to simply walk away from their house, creating a foreclosure.

by Falls Church on Jan 26, 2012 11:46 am  

yep, three things are coming in taxation (eventually)

1. Removing the home mortage deduction
2. A national VAT
3. Carbon/higher gas taxes.

On the state side, I don't know how much a mortage deduction would change revenue. I'd hazard a guess it isn't a huge amount. More to the point, I doubt it would change behavior much. Federal side would massively change behavior.

by charlie on Jan 26, 2012 12:12 pm  

Good for O'Malley.

by Fitz on Jan 26, 2012 12:58 pm  

Does anybody know why escalator replacement at Dupont Circle's south entrance is slated for 8.5 months? I realize it's off-topic, but I haven't been able to find a good answer anywhere and thought ggw might be the best place to ask. I've read the "it's narrow and deep and the manufacturer went out of business" excuses, but they all seem to dance around the issue of schedule, especially when WMATA claims they'll be working 24/7 on getting the entrance opened as quickly as possible. Entire buildings get built in 8.5 months- here we're talking about an escalator. Perhaps they could quell some of the anger over this issue if we actually saw a decent project plan.

by BC on Jan 26, 2012 2:39 pm  

That stinks about the Met Branch trail in MoCo. What can MBT users do to lobby for a reversal of that decision?

by Ward 1 Guy on Jan 26, 2012 4:42 pm  

@BC:

I agree this seems like an absurd amount of time. 1-2 months seems reasonable. Remember, 8 1/2 months is only the estimate, so it is likely to actually take two years.

I heard somewhere that the Empire State building took only a year to build.

by Ben on Jan 27, 2012 11:17 am  

@Ben

The ESB also had at least five workers who died during construction. Not to mention being in an entirely different era.

Look, this isn't like just removing an escalator and dropping in a new one. These aren't standard escalators either (ever seen one that long in a mall?), nor is it an easy space.

For all of those who think the project should take less time, what are you basing that on? Do you have some construction estimating experience to share? If so, please pass it along. I'd love to see a comparable project's timeframe.

by Alex B. on Jan 27, 2012 11:38 am  

Is the escalator at Dupont south even that big? I know the one at the north station is very long, but the south one never seemed as large.

by charlie on Jan 27, 2012 11:41 am  

@charlie

The station is essentially level. The ground above it is essentially level. The angle of the escalators is essentially the same. They're the same length.

The biggest challenge is that the south entrance tunnel is much narrower, providing a lot less space to work in and dismantle the old escalators and install the new ones. Compare the width of that passageway to the north entrance, or to Woodley Park, or to other deep-level stations.

For the same reason that it's easier to install wiring in a new house before you put up the sheetrock, it's a lot harder (and will take longer) to install these new escalators in a confined space with some severe limitations.

by Alex B. on Jan 27, 2012 11:52 am  

@AlexB; thanks. Funny, the north escalator always SEEMS longer to me, but shows where ancedote will take you.

The confined space problem would be less if they had two (and a stairway) instead of 3.

by charlie on Jan 27, 2012 1:01 pm  

@Charlie

Not really. Stairs take up space, too. Unless you'd be proposing that they'd be removing said stairs and then re-installing them - but I doubt that would accelerate the timeframe to complete the work.

The north escalator probably seems longer because of the more open space it occupies. With the walls further away, I'll bet we perceive the movement to be slower (when it is the same) and the distance to be longer (when it is also the same).

by Alex B. on Jan 27, 2012 1:13 pm