Pedestrians
Too many construction sites close sidewalks without walkway
A DDOT policy requires construction sites to maintain a walkway for pedestrians. But at numerous sites around the city, this doesn't happen. Many construction sites inconvenience and endanger pedestrians, while site developers use former sidewalks as staging areas.
DDOT's Pedestrian Safety and Work Zone Standards Order from 2007 states: "Traffic control plans should replicate the existing pedestrian pathway as nearly as practical and that the pedestrian pathway should not be severed or moved for non-construction activities such as parking for vehicles or the storage of materials or equipment."
However, numerous construction sites are not following this policy, and DDOT could do more to enforce it.
In the heart of downtown, the CityCenter site has been under construction for over a year. Construction has taken over the sidewalk around more than ¾ of the site, yet only the northern section has any temporary walkway.
On any given day, pedestrians walk along the construction fencing on 9th, 11th, and H Streets, in traffic because they don't want to deal with the hassle and delay of sometimes 4 additional crosswalks to get to their destinations.
Throughout the site excavation, the developer closed all the sidewalks. This happened despite DDOT's policy stating that an open or covered walkway should be provided on the sidewalk if possible, or otherwise in the roadway. Once frame construction begins, which happened recently, the preference then is a covered walkway in the roadway.
At the construction site of the Convention Center hotel a few blocks north, at 9th and Massachusetts NW, the sidewalks there have also been closed for months throughout multiple stages of construction.
The problem is not unique to Northwest. In Northeast, on Bladensburg Road near the "starburst" intersection, the sidewalk is closed for an entire block on the north side, where a new condo development is rising. In Southeast, in the Navy Yard area, sidewalks are closed at 4th Street by the upcoming Boilermaker Shops, and on various blocks around the last phase of EYA's Capitol Quarter townhome development.


Left: Next to the Boilermaker Shops on 4th St SE.
Right: Sidewalks closed for Capitol Quarter construction on L St SE.
In some cases, upon receiving complaints, DDOT has inspected sites like these and then ordered the developer to provide a walkway. This is good, but pedestrian accommodation should not be reactionary. It needs to be a priority in the traffic management and permitting process.
Where sidewalk space is tight, DDOT should show leadership and use road space to create temporary walkways. Pedestrians should not have to bear the sole inconvenience of the construction. Sometimes it means closing a lane of traffic to move the sidewalk (and bike lane where necessary) out from their original location.
Stronger policies and enforcement will encourage developers to use their available space to its maximum extent, instead of leaving tools and junk lying around like the picture to the right. If they are forced to get permits for walkways in the roadway, this will also encourage them to bring construction activities back within the parcel envelope as quickly as possible, to the benefit of everyone.
On the northeast corner of the CityCenter site, the developer has managed to preserve close to 100 public parking spaces. In light of this, saying that the sidewalks have to be closed because of space constraints is simply insulting.
Some may say that the inconvenience people on foot face by having to cross the street is minor, and doesn't merit burdening construction planners with stricter requirements and additional safety measures, or potentially inconveniencing drivers by closing a lane of traffic. Yet we impose all kinds of other, more onerous restrictions on developers for far more capricious reasons.
Closing a sidewalk on one side of the street inconveniences pedestrians in the same way that closing a two-way street to one entire direction of traffic would drivers. If I am walking 4 blocks along one side of the street, and the sidewalk is closed for one of them, I have to cross at least two additional times, assuming there are no mid-block alleys, and the intersections are all simple 4-way intersections. This means waiting at least two additional light cycles and walking out of my way.
Many pedestrians choose not to endure the inconvenience, and instead endanger themselves and others by walking in the street rather than crossing.
Only in the rarest of cases are motorists asked to endure months-long closures like this. Why, then do DC's pedestrians have to deal with this every day?
As DC's urban population grows and development activity picks up again, it may be time to revisit the pedestrian accommodation policy. In the meantime, DDOT needs to better use the policy it has in place to keep pedestrians safe.
Where else in the city have builders been allowed to close sidewalks? Post them in the comments.
Comments
- Community stories show the shift to a walkable lifestyle
- Focus transportation on downtown or neighborhoods?
- Young kids try to assault me while biking
- Some are pushing to limit sidewalk cycling
- Where is downtown Prince George's County?
- Endless zoning update delay hurts homeowners
- Metro bag searches aren't always optional












by MrTinDC on Apr 12, 2012 11:54 am • link • report
by inlogan on Apr 12, 2012 11:59 am • link • report
by Rob P on Apr 12, 2012 12:04 pm • link • report
For whatever reason, there are certain types of enforcement that the DC govt simply does not do very well. This is one. Cabs are another, commercial vehicles another. We could all probably add a few more to the list (fishing licenses my father always reminds me when he visits).
by dcdriver on Apr 12, 2012 12:04 pm • link • report
by hwywhiz on Apr 12, 2012 12:14 pm • link • report
by Cassidy on Apr 12, 2012 12:23 pm • link • report
by EN on Apr 12, 2012 12:24 pm • link • report
I don't like closing traffic lanes either; does anyone know if DDOT asks for a "Traffic Impact statement" or other mitigation? I am dealing with this on 20th (former Verizon building).
On a related note, who pays for repairing streets aftter 5000 trucks have gone over it?
by charlie on Apr 12, 2012 12:24 pm • link • report
http://g.co/maps/7pbn8
Now pedestrians are forced to walk on an exit ramp, against traffic, on a blind curb.
A few weeks ago, I stopped by a couple of foreman looking guys, and asked them when they thought the crossing would be back up, and they both laughed and said, "Hey buddy! Your guess is as good as mine! Not any time soon, though!"
by oboe on Apr 12, 2012 12:31 pm • link • report
by Jasper on Apr 12, 2012 12:33 pm • link • report
by charlie on Apr 12, 2012 12:40 pm • link • report
That's a bit of hyperbole. Motorists are forced every day to deal with road closures, detours, obstructions, traffic from construction, etc. I don't own a car and even I know that.
Reality is that these projects you mentioned are all progressive, mixed-use sites that will ultimately provide huge benefit for pedestrians and other non-motorists in ways this city hasn't seen in many decades. Better enforcement would be optimal, but in most cases, pedestrians are giving up relatively little (an extra few seconds or minutes to their journey) in order to get a lot in return. And the city has to strike that balance of responsible enforcement and accomodation versus overburdening private businesses.
Re: photos. They can be pretty easily deconstructed.
On Bladensburg Rd, did the photographer stop and ask these people why they were walking in a median? Who's to say these people would not normally walk on medians regardless of whether construction is present? And why could they not simply walk an extra 25 feet to the other side of the street?
On 14th street NW, the woman is walking through former parking converted to a no-parking tow zone (an inconvenience to motorists, which the author conveniently ommitted) which is very unlikely to be a path for motorists. She is also buffered from the traffic on 14th street by the bike lane. At a glance, the risk to her personal safety seems very minor...and she doesn't appear too concerned, what with her iPod earbuds still in as she walks into the road. I wasn't there to ask her whether she felt safe... But the photographer was.
by Scoot on Apr 12, 2012 12:57 pm • link • report
Not to mention that in many cases the sidewalk detour is built into the roadway, taking away either parking or a driving lane (or both).
I'm not saying that's wrong, and I agree with the problem identified in the article and that better enforcement should occur, but both drivers and pedestrians are impacted by construction and the goal should be to minimize the burdens on both and improve the safety for both.
by ah on Apr 12, 2012 1:02 pm • link • report
There is a God if Oboe is being forced to work out in Tysons. I just hope he bikes out there.
It keeps me focused on what's important.
And the biking's gotten a lot easier now that it's not pitch black and about 30 degrees when I roll out.
by oboe on Apr 12, 2012 1:04 pm • link • report
"Traffic control plans should replicate the existing pedestrian pathway as nearly as practical"
The language is right there. It isn't a hard rule. When the situation allows and it makes the most sense in terms of coordination and safety, DDOT will do what they can, but they can exercise judgement in the case.
I am not a very big DDOT fan, but this just screams "first world problem.
For example, at City Center, you have a sheer 70 foot drop at the public space line. To have kept that sidewalk supported so that it didn't fall into the hole and used by the public would have required increased shoring, and pinning costing in the million dollar range, all for a 24 month barely used sidewalk.
"Oh, then they should definitely be closing streets to cars and putting sidewalks in the street then!!"
Yeah, cause it makes sense to take lanes out of a congested street in the heart of downtown that carries ~16000 cars a day.
I mean, jeez...the City Center project is literally the poster child for all the urbanist ideals this blog is built around, literally turning a massive parking lot into a 800 million dollar urbanist paradise, and all it requires is the relative handful of people who used that sidewalk on a daily basis to spend an extra 30 seconds to walk on the other side of the street for 18-24 months.
[Deleted for violating the comment policy.]
by reg on Apr 12, 2012 1:16 pm • link • report
The writer has "zero knowledge or experience" with crossing the street at a traffic signal in this area. Waiting through two light cycles, plus two crossings of the street, adds several minutes to your trip.
by Ben Ross on Apr 12, 2012 1:23 pm • link • report
by Tom on Apr 12, 2012 1:38 pm • link • report
by selxic on Apr 12, 2012 1:44 pm • link • report
by MrTinDC on Apr 12, 2012 1:53 pm • link • report
by D on Apr 12, 2012 1:55 pm • link • report
by JG on Apr 12, 2012 2:02 pm • link • report
by selxic on Apr 12, 2012 2:23 pm • link • report
by John on Apr 12, 2012 3:16 pm • link • report
Wow, hard to believe what I am reading here? The construction in Adams Morgan was to replace the sidewalks! And when finished, the project will result in much wider, smoother, prettier, safer sidewalks.
If anything, motorists bore the brunt of this Adams Morgan project because almost all the construction equipment and barriers were in the road.
by Scoot on Apr 12, 2012 3:29 pm • link • report
DCRA is a corrupt cesspool. The developers are simply paying off the inspectors and any ciations magically disappear. DCRA has no problem citing small-fry consignment stores for not having proper "pawn shop" licensing, but it will never go after big developers, particularly when they're in bed with the city like the City Center project.
It's a major hassle, safety hazard, and an injustice for the people who pay for and use the sidewalks - DC residents. NYC handles much bigger and much more complex construction with very little sidewalk disruption, so there's really no excuse.
by Annonny on Apr 12, 2012 3:56 pm • link • report
They're already walking and driving around in the same areas, aren't distracted by solving "real" crimes, and it stands to reason that a blocked sidewalk deserves as much attention as a blocked road.
by andrew on Apr 12, 2012 4:09 pm • link • report
What worse is that the latest construction there and in the next block has basically reduced it to a 2 lane road with no parking on either side, yet they still haven't extended a walkway on the west side of the street, despite there being plenty of space to do so now. (Sorry for the bad explanation, someone else who knows the area should try to describe it better!)
by Kelly on Apr 12, 2012 6:06 pm • link • report
Because of this construction / sidewalk removal, they moved a bus stop from well-lit 7th Street NE to industrial, not-as-well-lit 8th Street, which is inconvenient.
To whom should we speak about having DDOE come around and address this?
by Stella on Apr 13, 2012 8:53 am • link • report
I think the situation overall has improved in the past 10-15 years. Remember 15 years ago when EVERY street and sidewalk was torn up by the telco's to run fiber optics? Remember 8 or 10 years ago when both sides of Mass Ave were unavailable to pedestrians on nearly each and every block? Remember 4-8 years ago when every world bank or presidential inauguration pretty much shut down every sidewalk in downtown and forced pedestrians to walk in the street without ANY protective barriers? We're doing pretty much OK today.
by BO on Apr 13, 2012 8:58 am • link • report
Arlington is just as bad. The nightmare that is the Rosslyn Metro bus stop continues another year.
by charlie on Apr 13, 2012 9:33 am • link • report
The moment a pedestrian gets killed circumventing a closed sidewalk by walking in the street, maybe then the powers that be will take notice. Until then one is taking their life in their hands.
Curious, because there is a sign that reads "Sidewalk closed, use other side of street" Is the sign there because DDOT gave permission for the sign" or the contractor did it because of lack enforcement?
by dcdotcom on Apr 13, 2012 11:10 am • link • report
by Maryland Ave on Apr 13, 2012 11:15 am • link • report
by charlie on Apr 13, 2012 11:20 am • link • report
Better enforcement would be optimal, but in most cases, pedestrians are giving up relatively little (an extra few seconds or minutes to their journey) in order to get a lot in return. And the city has to strike that balance of responsible enforcement and accomodation versus overburdening private businesses.
As Ben points out it can be a couple of minutes. Most people are willing to walk about 20 minutes to get someplace before they go for another method. So this cuts that distance by 10%. And if one is elderly or disabled it gets even worse. A driving delay of two minutes is not the same as being made to walk for two extra minutes - especially if you're old or it's raining or it's hot or it's cold...
Who's to say these people would not normally walk on medians regardless of whether construction is present?
I bike this road every day, and before construction I saw people almost exclusively on the sidewalk.
And why could they not simply walk an extra 25 feet to the other side of the street?
They could, but it's an inconvenience. Just as you could pay higher taxes, but you'd rather not.
If anything, motorists bore the brunt of this Adams Morgan project because almost all the construction equipment and barriers were in the road.
No, not really.
by David C on Apr 13, 2012 3:49 pm • link • report
by Anne on Apr 15, 2012 5:22 pm • link • report
wimp.
by Jack Love on Apr 16, 2012 10:08 am • link • report
by Anon20009 on Apr 16, 2012 1:29 pm • link • report
by FDS on Apr 20, 2012 11:28 am • link • report
by Geoffrey Hatchard on Apr 22, 2012 7:56 pm • link • report
CityCenterDC is an $850 million development. The developers can damn well figure out a way to accommodate pedestrian access if they're actually required to do so. If they can build an 80-story skyscraper in New York City while keeping the sidewalk open, they can figure out a way to build in DC.
A real embarrassment to the city.
by Adam F on May 2, 2012 7:55 pm • link • report
Add a Comment