Links
Breakfast links: Congress and bikes
Photo by Eric Gilliland on Flickr.
Issa OK with commuter tax: Toward the end of a hearing on DC's height limit, Rep. Darrel Issa suggested that DC should be able to impose a commuter tax. Though even if such a proposal does get passed, it is unclear what other conditions there would be. (DCist) 
Can't kill cooperation: Though Congress has stopped funding the Sustainable Communities, that hasn't stopped government agencies from working together to help promote smart growth. (Streetsblog)
Conflict resolution: Adding streetcars to Columbia Pike could cause a conflict with bicyclists so bike advocates and Arlington County are working on possible solutions, such as installing bike boulevards and parallel streets. (ARLnow)
A place to cross: Crossing the George Washington Parkway can be dangerous for bikers, so how about installing a bike specific crossing signal like the ones used on Dutch bike highways? (RPUS)
Bike to Wolf Trap: With a new bridge over the Dulles Toll Road, biking to Wolf Trap has never been easier. When leaving, it might even be quicker than driving, though Wolf Trap could use some better bike parking. (FABB)
Sprawl worsens drought: With its increased water use and runoff, sprawl might be worsening the effects of the drought. Increased carbon emissions from sprawl contribute to climate change, possibly making the drought itself more severe. (Streetsblog)
And...: Eleanor Holmes Norton finds DC architecture "undistinguished." (Examiner) ... Some Tea Party freshman don't mind spending taxpayer money on their personal cars. (Streetsblog) ... None of the likely candidates for mayor has a clear advantage, but Fenty would easily defeat Gray in a rematch. (Post)
Have a tip for the links? Submit it here.
 | Steven Yates grew up in Indiana before moving to DC in 2002 to attend college at American University. He currently lives in Southwest DC.   |
Comments
Bikeshare is a gateway to private biking, not competition
- Bikeshare is a gateway to private biking, not competition
- Judge denies injunction against closing schools
- Long-term closures: A solution to single-tracking?
- Public land deals have both benefits and pitfalls
- Metro policy for refunds after delays falls short, riders say
- PG planners propose bold new smart growth future
- Prince George's County struggles to get trails right
Sun May 26
11:00 am Roosevelt Ride in Greenbelt
Sat Jun 1
10:00 am CSG walking tour of Wheaton
Tue Jun 4
6:30 pm Height limit meeting at NCPC
by Joe Flood on Jul 20, 2012 8:46 am • link • report
The obstacles have always been the MD and VA congress critters who traditionally control District committees. Of course they're adamantly against it. They have less influence in a GOP Congress.
by Tom Coumaris on Jul 20, 2012 8:55 am • link • report
by movement on Jul 20, 2012 9:03 am • link • report
by Elle on Jul 20, 2012 9:11 am • link • report
VA and MD jurisdictions have commuter taxes themselves
Umm, which jurisdictions? As far as I know DC, VA and MD all have reciprocity agreements.
Personally I am split on the commuter tax idea. I like the idea of DC being able to collect something from people who come into the city every day, but at the same time what effect would it have on companies deciding to relocate?
Personally I think trying to zone for more density and increase heights is a better way for the city to get more people to live in DC, more property ownership, and more tax revenue.
by MLD on Jul 20, 2012 9:17 am • link • report
The more I think about it, the more I think a commuter tax & height restrictions (in L'Enfant City) are among the few things I'd actually side with having a federal role.
RE: GW Pkwy Crossing
Just to clarify- it wouldn't be a bike signal; it'd more likely be a typical ped signal unless the trail becomes segregated by mode. I'd also question whether a signal is the best way to go... personally, I'd prefer a cutting down, dropping in a prefab tunnel, and calling it an evening. The grades are actually somewhat conducive toward this.
by Bossi on Jul 20, 2012 9:21 am • link • report
Off-topic: I nearly hit a bicyclist in Hyattsville yesterday. He completely ignored a stop sign on the trail and crossed the street without slowing down. Fortunately, I saw him and anticipated his behavior.
by selxic on Jul 20, 2012 9:21 am • link • report
by drumz on Jul 20, 2012 9:22 am • link • report
by drumz on Jul 20, 2012 9:28 am • link • report
Keep your eyes and ears ready folks. The Post is up to it's old tricks.
Respondents think that Gray should resign and would favor Fenty in a rematch. But, this same group have only an 11% favorable opinion on Machen..the man who's doing the yeoman's work making it possible for Gray to retire. This group dislikes Machen? Ok, why?
Only 1 and 10 residents have a "favorable" impression of Tommy Wells. Blacks have fallen out of favor w/Gray and his strongest support is among whites and the city's wealthiest. Really?
Watch out folks, the Post is at it again.
On another note, the last time I drove GW Parkway, even I became nervous when I saw a cyclist @a crossing and wondered how in hell was that in any way safe. Way too much traffic at too high a speed. Keep the cameras away.
by HogWash on Jul 20, 2012 9:32 am • link • report
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P1RNisaWSbM
That is not a bike highway. That's just a regular bike path through a (new) suburb that was (re)built/expanded in the last decade (Westerpark is new and Tuinzicht has seen significant renovation). It's in my home town, and I've seen it been built over the years. It is the result of the (new) policies in the Netherlands that require governments to treat cars, buses, bikes and pedestrians all as equally important when building infrastructure. 15 years ago, Westerpark was agriculture. Fields and greenhouses. Picked cucumbers and tomatoes in there.
The movie roughly follows this route east to west:
View Larger Map
There's also a weirdo intersection with a traffic light for cars, and a straight by-pass for buses.
View Larger Map
Part of the reason there are good separate bike routes there is payback for a decade of traffic hell (combined with a good chunk of eminent domain) due to construction of the HSR line from Amsterdam to Paris, and the expansion of the A16 highway, which the main highway between the Rotterdam and Antwerp harbors. Many a time when I came back to visit, all my regular routes to and from Breda had changed again. Very frustrating to feel like you don't know the way in a place where you grew up.
The local community even managed to get an over-the-new-highway park as compensation for all the mess. This shot shows it under construction.
View Larger Map
by Jasper on Jul 20, 2012 9:32 am • link • report
by CraigH on Jul 20, 2012 9:40 am • link • report
http://goo.gl/maps/DM3i
If you really want to cut speeds down to the 40MPH range, a single signal isn't going to do it. Unexpected stops in the middle of a windy parkway are an accident waiting to happen.
by movement on Jul 20, 2012 9:43 am • link • report
Not as long as Frank Wolf keeps his job. And if Roscoe Bartlett squeaks by due to Dem ineptitude, Maryland suburbanites will have a similar ally and advocate.
by Kolohe on Jul 20, 2012 9:43 am • link • report
Can anybody tell me why there are people excusing VA (&MD) for not having enough power in the House when both the majority and minority whips are from VA and MD?
by Jasper on Jul 20, 2012 9:47 am • link • report
Just to clarify: I don't think you've got those poll numbers correct.
Keep your eyes and ears ready folks. The Post is up to it's old tricks.
...
Watch out folks, the Post is at it again.
See the results here:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/polling/dc-mayoral-hopefuls-widely-unknown/2012/07/19/gJQAutEswW_page.html
Wells is 27% favorable, 10% unfavorable, 63% no opinion.
Machen is 11% favorable, 7% unfavorable, and 82% no opinion.
by Alex B. on Jul 20, 2012 9:49 am • link • report
Re: Commuter Tax-How exactly would you enforce the tax on MD residents? I assume it's fairly easy from the VA side as there are limited connections, but really, how do you do it on the MD side.?
by thump on Jul 20, 2012 9:52 am • link • report
by Sally on Jul 20, 2012 9:53 am • link • report
It would be income tax - in some states if you live in one and work in another, you have to pay income tax in both - not the full rate but a split.
by MLD on Jul 20, 2012 9:58 am • link • report
A commuter tax would probably not take the form of transportation charges at entry/exit points (that'd be more akin to what congestion pricing would do). Rather, it'd most likely be an income tax applied to all DC-generated salaries/wages.
Combined with the height restrictions, would a commuter tax increase the potential for businesses to relocate to the edge cities outside DC, nearer to their employees' homes?
And as for neighboring jurisdictions enacting similar legislation in response: it's worth keeping in mind that I don't *think* they could specify the tax to only apply to DC, as that violates interstate laws. Instead they'd have to enact a commuter tax on everyone... both Maryland and Virginia could face some significant consequences of such an action given each state's relationships with other neighboring states.
by Bossi on Jul 20, 2012 10:01 am • link • report
You absolutely can specify that the reciprocity or lack thereof apply to specific states:
http://www.payroll-taxes.com/articles/175-state-tax-reciprocal-agreements.htm
Maryland and Virginia could just decide that DC residents are no longer exempt but residents of other nearby states still are.
by MLD on Jul 20, 2012 10:08 am • link • report
District residents (me being one of thems) just need to get over it. I've lived here since Home Rule (which among many things banned a commuter tax)and in the 40 years since this has been brought up no less than 30 times. It ends in resounding failure each time.
Why? Because 300K MD and VA residents earn ~25 billion dollars a year in taxable income, income MD and VA prefers to keep at home, regardless or not whether it would bolster DC's yearly tax collections by ~700 million.
The best chance DC has ever had was the first two years of Obama's administration. It simply won't happen.
The best we can hope for is that Congress continues to occasionally pay us a yearly grant of ~600-700 million, otherwise...this is just yet another attempt at complete defeat.
by tax on Jul 20, 2012 10:09 am • link • report
Ahh, good to know. Then yeah, I suppose that does indeed become another point of consideration when it comes to commuter taxes. Thanks!
by Bossi on Jul 20, 2012 10:11 am • link • report
View Larger Map
This picture appears to be from July 2009. I'm not sure if they are hard to see in this picture or if they had not been added, but the trail has stop signs now. I stopped at the stop sign for road traffic where the white truck is. Then I was moving on. Fortunately, the area has good visibility so I could see the cyclist coming.
by selxic on Jul 20, 2012 10:13 am • link • report
Correct. It is an income tax, everywhere else in the nation (afaik) does it this way. You would pay DC state income tax (8.5%) and then would be able to claim those taxes paid on your VA/MD/WVA tax return, leading to no tax due.
I personally work in MD, so I would pay MD state income tax which is ~5.5%, and then would be able to claim that as a deduction, and would then pay the remaining ~3% to DC.
As far as numbers, this would be a HUGE net positive. Using very VERY rough estimates, I would say there are ~350,000 DC residents working. Guesstimating maybe 100,000 work outside of the city. We would get roughly 1/3 of the income tax we currently get from those people (8.5%-5.5%). Saying the average person makes $50,000. We would be losing ~275,000,000 from those folks ($50,000*5.5%*100,000)
We know there are something like 600,000 jobs in the city, so saying that DC workers take up 250,000 of those jobs, that means we have 350,000 commuters. We would go from collecting 0% tax on those folks, to now collecting 8.5%. Assuming again $50,000 salaries, we would then collect an additional 8.5% from those folks. This would be additional collections of $1,487,500,000. ($50,000*8.5%*350,000)
This gives us a net increase of $1,212,500,000. I have heard we currently get a subsidy of $800,000,000 to cover this shortfall, so that would go away, giving us an increase in revenue of ~400,000,000. Very rough estimates, but I don't see how this doesn't turn into a huge positive.
by Kyle W on Jul 20, 2012 10:14 am • link • report
I'm not really sure the additional layer would interact with commuter taxes.
by Gray on Jul 20, 2012 10:30 am • link • report
This is an issue that SHOULD be amenable to splitting the difference, though historically suburban pols have stood on "principle".
by AWalkerInTheCity on Jul 20, 2012 10:30 am • link • report
Plus, any Congress where such a tax would be supported is probably a Congress where we could get congestion pricing, a much simpler source of revenue that has the effect of discouraging bad things. Why not just do that?
by Corey on Jul 20, 2012 10:37 am • link • report
I haven't been able to check out whatever improvements have been made to the GW Parkway crossings yet but signage (SLOW DOWN PED CROSSING) and flashing lights are a step in the right direction.
by aaa on Jul 20, 2012 10:42 am • link • report
So much fun for everyone who works one place and lives in another to fill out one more tax return.
And, BTW, we wouldn't be collecting the full amount of the DC income tax on the commuters. It would be, absent a radical change to how this works in the absence of reciprocity agreements, a tax only on the difference in what the person's tax liability would be if they lived in DC and what it is in MD or VA.
by ah on Jul 20, 2012 10:50 am • link • report
by MLD on Jul 20, 2012 10:55 am • link • report
Turbotax. One year I had to fill out three state returns, it took me about an extra hour. Valid concern though, but not worth the lost revenue imo. Everywhere else in the nation manages it, I am sure we could figure it out.
Regarding the full amount of income tax... I do believe we would. That is how that works. We collect the full amount, they get to deduct it on their VA/MD return.
by Kyle W on Jul 20, 2012 10:57 am • link • report
2. Nearly 400,000 commuters come into the District every day, forcing a resident population of 600,000 to maintain city services used by over a million people.
3. The Height Act restricts the total available space for development, thus reducing the tax base.*
In short, something has got to give. Either Congress enacts a PILOT (payment in lieu of taxes) to make up for the lack of taxable land, allows a non-resident income tax, or permits higher building heights. Anything else is unsustainable.
*Before somebody suggests that there's plenty of land left to build up, we all know there is not. The point at which developers agree to pay the massive costs to deck over freeways and train tracks is the point at which we know the District no longer has any viable space left.
by Adam L on Jul 20, 2012 11:02 am • link • report
From the article: The poll reached 1,002 D.C. adults via land-line and mobile telephones.
Maybe this is an easy one, but where do they get their mobile numbers from?
by Thaps on Jul 20, 2012 11:06 am • link • report
That just means it easier to desk over highways than to deal with ANCs. DC has plenty, plenty of space to build up. DC has a much lower density than many other big cities. The height act is not responsible for that.
by Jasper on Jul 20, 2012 11:27 am • link • report
They're called speed cameras.
The commuter route speed cameras are predatory and they don't do a damn thing to "improve safety. Any discussion of a commuter tax for DC should have removal of the predatory speed cameras on the table.
by ceefer66 on Jul 20, 2012 11:47 am • link • report
They have one of these out in Aspen Hill on Viers Mill Road between Aspen Hill Rd and Randolph Rd if memory serves.
The fatal drawback for this type of signal is that it would pose even the slightest inconvenience for drivers. I mean, every 5 minutes or so, traffic would need to stop for upwards of 15 seconds. Show-stopper.
by oboe on Jul 20, 2012 11:48 am • link • report
by thump on Jul 20, 2012 11:48 am • link • report
Off-Topic: I was nearly hit by a car in Lincolnia yesterday. He completely ignored a red light on the road, and crossed the street without slowing down. Fortunately, I saw him and anticipated his behavior.
Also, I had a very nice Banh Mi sandwich for lunch, and my return commute was pleasant and relatively uneventful.
by oboe on Jul 20, 2012 11:51 am • link • report
They're called speed cameras.
The speed cameras are not a commuter tax. They are a stupidity tax. If you can't be bothered to pay attention to where the speed cameras are, which you are warned about ahead of time, and then after that can't be bothered to stay less than 10mph above the speed limit, then you get taxed $125 for your stupidity.
by JustMe on Jul 20, 2012 11:55 am • link • report
That's just not true. Of large cities (generally defined as >250k), the population density is as follows:
1. New York City (27,016)
2. San Francisco (17,169)
3. Boston (12,786)
4. Santa Ana (11,887)
5. Chicago (11,843)
6. Newark (11,452)
7. Philadelphia (11,379)
8. Miami (11,126)
9. Washington, D.C. (10,065)
10. Providence (9,676)
Even with the height limit, is in the top 10. Considering that we also have the second-highest percentage of urban parkland in the country, it is very safe to say that our population density is significantly higher than the official number. That means we're there.
And you don't think Hines is getting push back about the height of their development behind Union Station? Sure they are. You don't think that developers will get a massive amount of resistance from the Commission on Fine Arts to changes in Southwest? Of course they will. The regulatory bodies may be different, but the resistance to change is the same.
by Adam L on Jul 20, 2012 11:58 am • link • report
Hehehe...yeah, ok then.
At a population density of 10,000, the District has a long way to go. DC is filled with undeveloped, or underdeveloped land. Even in the Downtown Buisness District including NOMA and Mt. Vernon, and we haven't even talked about all the areas in NE, upper NW and SE that are massively underdevelped.
by notredline on Jul 20, 2012 11:59 am • link • report
They're called speed cameras.
It's called a speed limit for a reason, and it's pretty easy to avoid a ticket by simply going less than 7 mph (or is it 12 mph) OVER the speed limit.
I WISH we could get our speed camera back in Mt. Rainier so all the speeding "drive till you qualify" buyers of far-flung suburbs had to respect the speed limit through our town. Speeding is just arrogance ceefer66...it's the idea that you're time/you are more important/better than everyone else, and you're willing to risk others' safety to save seconds in commute time.
by thump on Jul 20, 2012 12:00 pm • link • report
No, I have the reporting correct. It just lacked context. What you provided (which I had read) was essentially my point. That the post is up to its old tricks again.
They've written yet another story about how DC residents feel about an issue where upward of 60 and 80% of respondents had no opinion. In short, it's a ridiculous poll with ridiculous findings that in no significant way represents the sentiment of DC voters.
Stirring up the old rusty pots.
by HogWash on Jul 20, 2012 12:01 pm • link • report
Where are the numbers from? Worth keeping in mind how they're calculated: is it by a core within DC, or DC to the border, or the DC metropolitan area? Likewise with other cities: how are the metropolitan areas measured?
By most definitions of metropolitan area: LA (not even on your list) has a higher density than the NYC; and comparing only NYC's Manhattan core to the entirety of DC's squarish boundaries -- much of which is suburban in nature -- would be a bit of an apples/orange comparison.
by Bossi on Jul 20, 2012 12:05 pm • link • report
by selxic on Jul 20, 2012 12:14 pm • link • report
It's not safe. But there's no existing alternative. The obvious immediate solution is to force drivers to slow down--to the posted speed limit.
by oboe on Jul 20, 2012 12:16 pm • link • report
@oboe- Where did that happen?
http://goo.gl/maps/AC6G
by oboe on Jul 20, 2012 12:18 pm • link • report
McMillian Sand Filtration Site (25 acres)
Walter Reed Site (35 Acres)
Dakota Crossing Development (42 acres)
These three alone, two of them in the central core of DC comprise of 100 acres of empty grass fields (or close to it) constituting ~4.3 million sq/ft of usable space.
For comparison sakes, thats more than the acrege of the National Mall downtown, from 3rd st to 14th, from Independance to Constitution...what would be 21 full city blocks of space.
If a city as small as the District still has open land available for 5 big box Walmart Stores, then we have a long way to go before the height limit is our problem.
by notredline on Jul 20, 2012 12:19 pm • link • report
The NYC number is all five buroughs; Manhattan itself is much more dense at 69,464 residents per square mile. The problem with LA is that the city proper (not LA County) is 470 square miles... a population density of 8,000 sq/mi. You could restrict that to say "Well, we should only count downtown LA" but then we could say the same thing about only counting areas of DC like Dupont/Logan/Columbia Heights, where the population densities range from 30k-60k per square mile.
by Adam L on Jul 20, 2012 12:20 pm • link • report
by thump on Jul 20, 2012 12:21 pm • link • report
The places you just mentioned are done and spoken for. As for the Walmarts, 5 of the 7 are in practically car-dependent places where you wouldn't want to place other density. Notice, I prefaced my original statement with saying we're out of "viable" locations. Sure, we could bulldoze some suburban-style neighborhoods or pave over Rock Creek Park but the question is, why would we want to do that?
by Adam L on Jul 20, 2012 12:24 pm • link • report
by goldfish on Jul 20, 2012 12:28 pm • link • report
Hyperbolic much? "Thousands of acres?" Yeah, right. Maybe 100s. Rock Creek Park is about 2,000 acres. We don't have an entire Rock Creek Park's worth of development to go. The entire District is around 40,000 acres.
by Adam L on Jul 20, 2012 12:32 pm • link • report
Here are the 250 densest cities in the world:
1-125: http://www.citymayors.com/statistics/largest-cities-density-125.html
126-250:http://www.citymayors.com/statistics/largest-cities-density-250.html
DC is 138th, behind sprawly cities as San Diego, Salt Lake City, Chicago, Denver, Honolulu, San Jose, Las Vegas, New Orleans, etc etc etc. Not to mention foreign cities like Lyon, Winnipeg, Copenhagen, Helsinki, Brussels, Cologne, Rotterdam, Dublin, Tel Aviv, Stockholm.
by Jasper on Jul 20, 2012 12:33 pm • link • report
I knew I would get some push-back for calling predatory speed camerad deliberately aimed at Maryland residents a de facto spped tax, but even I am surprised at the vitriol.
Let's look at this way: You guys want something. In order to get it, you need something from others. Among toose "others" are Maryland residents, who BTW have reporesentaives who can vote for or against what you want.
To imply that Maryland residents are "stupid" for getting nailed by ever-increasing speed cameras and "arrogant" for taking exception to an obviously predatory assault against them is a bit beyond the pale. Especially when you want something from use - more of our money.
It's like saying "Screw you. And don't forget to support our efforts". Won't wash, guys.
by ceefer66 on Jul 20, 2012 12:38 pm • link • report
by goldfish on Jul 20, 2012 12:39 pm • link • report
I knew I would get some push-back for calling predatory speed camerad deliberately aimed at Maryland residents a de facto spped tax, but even I am surprised at the vitriol.
Let's look at this way: You guys want something. In order to get it, you need something from others. Among those "others" are Maryland residents, who BTW have representaives who can vote for or against what you want.
To imply that Maryland residents are "stupid" for getting nailed by ever-increasing speed cameras and "arrogant" for taking exception to an obviously predatory assault against them is a bit beyond the pale. Especially when you want something from us - more of our money.
It's like saying "Screw you. And don't forget to support our efforts". Won't wash, guys.
by ceefer66 on Jul 20, 2012 12:42 pm • link • report
by thump on Jul 20, 2012 12:47 pm • link • report
It is not arrogant when the limits are set artificially low, to catch unaware people that are a driving safely. Like Independence Ave SE.
by goldfish on Jul 20, 2012 12:53 pm • link • report
by Tom Coumaris on Jul 20, 2012 12:56 pm • link • report
by movement on Jul 20, 2012 12:59 pm • link • report
That data is for metro area populations, which while it may make a fairer comparison, especially to foreign countries, it's certainly not a fair comparison in the United States.
However, it's even more irrelevant to talk about metro areas when discussing DC. The fact is that even if the DC area is not very dense, we're talking about restricting building heights in just one small portion of that total area. Great, build higher in Silver Spring and Arlington and Gaithersburg and Tysons and Leesburg for all I care; that's not going to resolve the fact that all those new revenues are going to Maryland and Virginia. Those states are already reaping the benefits of the federal government while not being forced to conform to any of the Congressional restrictions placed on the District.
by Adam L on Jul 20, 2012 1:11 pm • link • report
Then build higher in DC! Plenty of places where buildings are not to the height limit. There are enormous areas all over town where the height limit has not been reached. Fill it in!
by Jasper on Jul 20, 2012 1:15 pm • link • report
Seems dumb to catch so much slack over 5-10% of cameras, when the other 90-95% are in great locations and are saving lives. Seems those 10% should be redistributed to better locations with more pedestrians, and it would be accomplishing the goal of the program, and completely eliminate any suspicions that that is solely about money.
by Kyle W on Jul 20, 2012 1:17 pm • link • report
So just pave over the entire thing until it's a concrete wasteland full of 12-story boxes? Solid plan there, Jaspyboy.
Nobody wants to live in that environment. The thing that makes DC a great place to live in the variety of housing types, open space, and historic architecture. By building a little bit higher than we can now we may be able to fit in more people while preserving more than we otherwise could.
I can't help but think of the McMillan Plan, for example, if the developers could leave more open land if they were permitted to build higher structures on smaller land area. Or if there could have been dedicated space for the farmer's market at Hines if the developers could have shifted the proposed square footage into a somewhat taller structure.
Whereas some people in DC see the Height Act as being the pinnacle of historic preservation, I see it as as a main threat.
by Adam L on Jul 20, 2012 1:23 pm • link • report
by Adam L on Jul 20, 2012 1:27 pm • link • report
I'd like to agree with you, but I cannot. Given the way Stanton/Eastblanc has behaved during this process, they will take as much as they can get. The craft market has been on the block since the deal was crafted, because there was nothing to protect it.
by goldfish on Jul 20, 2012 1:28 pm • link • report
I can't believe there's even a serious debate about this. Drive the speed limit. Simple.
by Corey on Jul 20, 2012 1:31 pm • link • report
Lastly, speeding is less of a problem when volumes are high. It's tough to speed with a lot of other cars are around. It's off-peak hours when the roads are more open that speeding really becomes a problem (in the sidewalk comments yesterday I think someone mentioned a 90 mph ticket along FL Ave) and it's those off-peak hours when residents are most likely to be out shopping, dining, etc.
by thump on Jul 20, 2012 1:35 pm • link • report
The typical commuting worker isn't using schools, isn't using DC health services, is using Federal, not local parks, is using freeways that are mostly paid by fed gas taxes, had the federal government help pay the capital expenses and has their own local government subsidize the operating expenses of Metro.
And the commuter is paying sales taxes & restaurant (& alcohol) taxes when they purchase those things in the district (and out of towners pay hotel taxes if they're doing business with one of the those commuters). And the non-Federal government entities that own the buildings pay real estate taxes (and the Feds provide a payment in lieu of the real estate taxes they're exempt from)
In other words, the commuter is using far fewer government services than your typical DC resident, and a full accounting may possibly show a net positive.
by Kolohe on Jul 20, 2012 1:36 pm • link • report
If someone sees a sign that says, "this is the speed limit, and there is a speed camera here!" and he not just goes over the speed limit, but more than 10 mph over the speed limit after seeing that, and then complains that he got a fine, then I don't know how else to describe him, except as "stupid." He was stupid, and he paid the stupidity tax. Simple as that.
by JustMe on Jul 20, 2012 1:42 pm • link • report
Maybe you've been living in a cave all this time, but following the letter of the law is dangerous especially once you get outside of pedestrian areas. Driving at the speed of other traffic, maintaining proper following distance, and avoiding sudden stops are all far more important than artificial rules like speed limits. It would be one thing if speed and red-light cameras were about improving traffic safety. They aren't. They are a total money-grab. It is insulting to get a ticket in the mail for driving 58 MPH on an empty interstate highway. It has happened to many of us and we have a right to call it out for what it is.
by movement on Jul 20, 2012 1:43 pm • link • report
There is a school right next to that spot on Independence Avenue. The suburbanites who speed through Hill East need to slow down and I support anything that slows them down. I am pretty sure that the people who have had cars crash into their houses on the block of Independence immediately before that location do not think the speed camera is poorly located. I agree that the design of that stretch of Independence encourages speeding, but I am pretty sure you would oppose a redesign that slows down traffic. After all, the free-loading suburbanites speeding to their underwater McMansion in PG County are more important than the taxpaying residents of Hill East.
by rg on Jul 20, 2012 1:48 pm • link • report
No, I have the reporting correct.
I'm afraid you do not. You wrote: "Only 1 and 10 residents have a "favorable" impression of Tommy Wells."
This is not what the poll says. The poll says 27% have a favorable impression of Wells, not 10%.
They've written yet another story about how DC residents feel about an issue where upward of 60 and 80% of respondents had no opinion.
They have no opinion on certain subjects, like candidates for Mayor. They have very well-defined opinions on others. I'm not sure what your objection is.
by Alex B. on Jul 20, 2012 1:53 pm • link • report
I think by way of clarification, no one's calling "Maryland residents" stupid. Just that small percentage of truly stupid Marylanders which regularly speeds in photo enforcement zones. I mean, I guess it's somewhat understandable to not understand that well publicized penalties for breaking the law apply the first couple of times. But you'd think people would get the point after a while.
And calling a speed camera "predatory" is a bit like running out of gas, getting out of your car, and beating it on the hood with a baseball bat because it "betrayed" you. Anthropomorphizing inanimate objects may not be stupid, but it's not quite rational either.
by oboe on Jul 20, 2012 2:00 pm • link • report
Anti-camera people seem to be wanting to exploit the status quo of not being able to massively increase the number of traffic cops.
by drumz on Jul 20, 2012 2:02 pm • link • report
All this is self-evidently true. Unless the speed or red-light camera is in your neighborhood. In which case it's a critical part of our public safety infrastructure.
I presume that every jerk who speeds through my neighborhood lives somewhere. And I'd be willing to bet dollars to doughnuts they drive quite cautiously in their own neighborhood. Especially if they have kids.
So let's stop pretending that the speeders' inability to engage in adult perspective-taking is some sort of level-headed, rational risk-evaluation.
by oboe on Jul 20, 2012 2:04 pm • link • report
I didn't say that. I just said that you could. It's a choice. You could also build pretty buildings. Or not.
Look, I don't really have an opinion on the height law. But it is simply not true that DC is being held back because of the height restriction.
It is true that if DC wants to house more residents, up is pretty much the only way. But that has been done and can be done.
Does anybody have a percentage of how much of the area of DC is actually built up to the height limit?
Nobody wants to live in that environment.
Except for the massive number of people living in the 137 denser cities than DC.
by Jasper on Jul 20, 2012 2:10 pm • link • report
by thump on Jul 20, 2012 2:11 pm • link • report
I agree that the 1800 block of Independence has about 30-40 mph traffic speeds -- so put the speed trap where it is needed!
by goldfish on Jul 20, 2012 2:11 pm • link • report
Except for the massive number of people living in the 137 denser cities than DC.
Only ~60 of those cities are denser than DC currently is and yes I believe most of us would like our city to be dense but not be like those cities. I mean who wants DC to become the next Khartoum?! ;)
by MLD on Jul 20, 2012 2:15 pm • link • report
er no. NYC is denser than DC, and NYC is not built to 12 stories everywhere. It has huge areas of charming townhouses (such as north brooklyn) closely set 3 SFH and two family homes (most of the rest of brooklyn, parts of queens, etc) and significant areas of suburban type SFHS (parts of queens, most of Staten Island). It has the density it has because it has SOME areas with much greater heights and densities.
by AWalkerInTheCity on Jul 20, 2012 2:23 pm • link • report
If you go ask people in Khartoum what the biggest problem holding in Khartoum is, I doubt it will be density. Or the highrises...
http://postconflict.unep.ch/sudanreport/sudan_website/doccatcher/data/Photographs%20Figures%20and%20Captions%20by%20Chapter/Ch6/Chapter%20photos/6.2a%20Khartoum%20is%20by%20far%20DSC_0235.JPG
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/d4/Khartoum_panorama-1_-_by_ScubaBeer.jpg/1200px-Khartoum_panorama-1_-_by_ScubaBeer.jpg
https://www.google.com/search?q=khartoum&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a&um=1&ie=UTF-8&hl=en&tbm=isch&source=og&sa=N&tab=wi&ei=46IJUIvLFOKa0QHI35nfAw&biw=1340&bih=785&sei=5aIJUOOZB9Kq0AG90_DBAw
by Jasper on Jul 20, 2012 2:27 pm • link • report
Clearly. But there are expenses; no ambulance checks to see if you're a DC resident, police don't either. Heck, there's an entire division of the MPD that does nothing but provide VIP escorts through the city (not exactly a commuter-related issue, but similar).
While federal gas taxes help provide maintenance for federally designated roads and highways, DC residents are certainly paying a sizable match on those projects; the largest roadway projects DDOT are the 14th Street Bridge rehabilitation, new 11th Street Bridge, and New York Avenue Bridge rehabilitation... all of which aid commuters more than anybody else in the city.
In addition, since you mentioned WMATA, the District pays a full third of the cost of Metrorail (i.e. not including buses or Metroaccess) even though DC residents make up about 20% of the service area population.
So no, while commuters aren't using schools, there is a good amount of money spent by local taxpayers to accommodate commuters; but we do thank you for your sales taxes.
by Adam L on Jul 20, 2012 2:35 pm • link • report
by AWalkerInTheCity on Jul 20, 2012 2:42 pm • link • report
"I didn't say that. I just said that you could. It's a choice. You could also build pretty buildings. Or not."
It's a choice we also don't have to be forced to make. We can allow some higher buildings where they make sense, in areas, that can support it, and leave other areas with a variety of building types and heights.
"Does anybody have a percentage of how much of the area of DC is actually built up to the height limit?"
That's exactly my point. I don't think it's good policy to require that we maximize every possible square inch built up to the height limit before we finally say "Okay, NOW we can talk about making some adjustments!"
by Adam L on Jul 20, 2012 2:43 pm • link • report
Clearly there is a list of city services that are underutilized by commuters. But there is just as clearly a long list of services that are utilized, and in a few instances, utilized more than DC residents. You imply that a given commuter's utilization of roads, emergency services, water and sewage, trash and recycling, and so on, is offset by sales tax. That's ridiculous.
No one is arguing that a commuter tax should be anything approaching the burden of taxes in DC for residency, but you can't seriously believe that sales tax offsets the full public services burden incurred by a 40 hour work week in city.
by CJ on Jul 20, 2012 2:54 pm • link • report
You're saying that you are unwilling to pay any tax in the city you spend the majority of your time in each year, and that you want to break the law in that city with impunity.
As a DC resident, I will agitate to ACTUALLY install predatory traffic cameras in response to your attitude.
You are welcome.
by CJ on Jul 20, 2012 2:57 pm • link • report
Putting a traffic signal might make things safer for bikers, but it would also make things much less safe for drivers.
Why would a TCD make things less safe for drivers? Are drivers incapable of handling normal traffic situations?
Unexpected stops in the middle of a windy parkway are an accident waiting to happen.
Why would a stop at a traffic signal be unexpected?
@Bossi, +1 on the tunnel
@aaa, VA and McDonnell need that money to fund highways in Richmond.
Which is a reason why NoVa's Congressional delegation might support the commuter tax. Better that money stay in DC than go to Culpepper.
@ceefer66, To imply that Maryland residents are "stupid" for getting nailed by ever-increasing speed cameras and "arrogant" for taking exception to an obviously predatory assault against them is a bit beyond the pale.
No one was implying it. They were straight up saying it. Because obeying a speed limit is pretty simple really. BTW, it's not a tax, it's a penalty.
by David C on Jul 20, 2012 3:08 pm • link • report
My point was that only a very small part of DC is up to the height limit. Hence no reason to claim it's a bother.
I do think it's a major problem in DC that a large part of the population does not want to accept that it lives in a large city. You see this in the many ANC/NIMBY groups that claim that they live in quiet neighborhoods, despite being close to major governmental, touristic or other places of significance that would never exist in quiet neighborhoods.
by Jasper on Jul 20, 2012 3:13 pm • link • report
I drive regularly. Never have a problem doing the speed limit +- 5mph.
Don't want a ticket? Don't speed. If people tailgate you, get over and let them go by.
by Corey on Jul 20, 2012 3:33 pm • link • report
We're not talking about the cameras on neighborhood streets here, we're talking about cameras on roads like 295, the 395 tunnel, and outer NY Ave that are not accessible by pedestrians and are in nobody's "neighborhood." It's pretty clear that these are not set up for safety reasons.
As far as neighborhood cameras go, mine has one and a lot of residents have complained about it. (Personally, I am fine with it.)
by Phil on Jul 20, 2012 3:45 pm • link • report
ruh ro
by John Roberts on Jul 20, 2012 3:46 pm • link • report
That is very true. But fighting that attitude is one that requires lots of little battles all over the city over individual projects, and sometimes the developments will lose. Loosening the Height Act would allow flexibility. No one is talking about a full repeal, or allowing skyscrapers downtown. But when you go to Friendship Heights, on one side of the street you have 14 story buildings and on the other side you have 8 story buildings. It makes absolutely no sense, and I don't see why irrationalities like that should be allowed to continue.
by JW on Jul 20, 2012 3:51 pm • link • report
be careful what you wish for......
by Rich on Jul 20, 2012 4:00 pm • link • report
Actually, no, we are talking about cameras on neighborhood streets. Just because lots of cars use them to get too and from DC, doesn't mean that local concerns are any less valid or that the safety of locals shouldn't be considered.
Ceefer66 originally said DC already ALREADY has a commuter tax, especially on commuters from Maryland.
They're called speed cameras.
The commuter route speed cameras are predatory and they don't do a damn thing to "improve safety. Any discussion of a commuter tax for DC should have removal of the predatory speed cameras on the table.
I actually agree with you, and I think others here might too, that some cameras, like on limited access roads aren't great, and probably hurt support for them, but as I also pointed out, there are plenty of commuter routes that aren't limited access and should have speed cameras b/c the people that live in those neighborhoods are put at risk by speeding drivers.
by thump on Jul 20, 2012 4:10 pm • link • report
Secondly: For DC to get its fair share and to end the dictatorship of Congress, the best option is retrocession back to Maryland. DC has vastly improved over the last few decades and is far more desiable (in terms of the economy and safety). There's only one obstacle to MD approval: Ward 8...
by King Terrapin on Jul 20, 2012 4:38 pm • link • report
Or to turn it around, speed *does* kill. If speeds were reduced, it wouldn't be so incredibly critical for pedestrians, cyclists, and others to stay the f*** out of the way of speeding autos at all times. As it is, we take populated areas, throw a bunch of signage up marginalizing pedestrians and others. And when anyone is insufficiently deferential to the speeding traffic (child, dog, whatever), you blame the victim for not obeying GTFOOMY.
This "peds not obeying crosswalks and signals are dangerous" is a symptom of a sick culture, not a reasonable analysis.
by oboe on Jul 20, 2012 5:00 pm • link • report
One last thing: I'm not positive that retrocession to Maryland would be particularly attractive to a future DC with a "normal" poverty load. Political autonomy might trump federal representation in that case.
by oboe on Jul 20, 2012 5:03 pm • link • report
" there are plenty of commuter routes that aren't limited access and should have speed cameras b/c the people that live in those neighborhoods are put at risk by speeding drivers."
----
That comment would be most cogent IF the cameras were actually deployed in neighborhoods that were actually at risk of "speeding drivers".
Consider this:
On westbound East Captitol Street, a mobile speed camera (mounted on an unmarked police car with an often-sleeping officer at the wheel) is deployed during rush hours under the 295 overpass. The police car hides beside a bridge abutment where it is invisible to drivers on that side of the road until they are right next to where the police car is hiding.
That section of East Capitol Street is an underpass that leads to a bridge over the Anacostia River, continuing around RFK Stadium and further westbound.
There are NO homes in that area and there are NO sidewalks or bike lanes. In fact, pedestrians and bikes are expressly prohibited (signs are prominently posted) both in the underpass and on the bridge.
About 1.5 miles west, on East Capitol beyond RFK, is a neighborhood where the Stadium-Armory Metro Station, Eastern High School, 2 large churches, a parochial elementary school, numerous homes, and several apartment complexes are located. The area literally crawls with pedestrians - many young children and some elderly - all day long. In 8 years of driving through that area almost daily, I have NEVER seen a speed camera deployed on that section of East Capitol Street. NEVER.
You want to know why the police car with the speed camera is located where it is instead of in the busy neighborhood with the schools, churches, homes, and Metro station? Because there is no place to hide and drivers would see the clearly-visible camera-mounted police vehicle in plently of time to slow down and avoid a ticket.
Now, I ask you:
In which of the two sections of East Capitol Street that I just described do YOU think a speed camera would best serve the interests "people...in...neighborhoods...put at risk by speeding drivers?
In which of the two areas do you think the deployment of the speed camera is predatory?
by ceefer66 on Jul 20, 2012 5:28 pm • link • report
One more thing:
How can any reasonable person expect drivers to respect the Automated Speed Enforcement Program considering cases like the one I described?
by ceefer66 on Jul 20, 2012 5:31 pm • link • report
by sk on Jul 20, 2012 5:40 pm • link • report
Trust me, the very LAST thing the DC speed camera lovers want is retrocession of DC to Maryland.
In MD, speed cameras are legal in only 2 places - school zones and highway construction sites. Maryland officials can't throw up a speed camera anywhere they please just to generate tickets.
by ceefer66 on Jul 20, 2012 5:49 pm • link • report
Glad someone broached this subject. My guess is that the reason most middle-class white dudes love officer enforcement is that a) it's cripplingly expensive, so you can't have very much of it; and b) they're usually the ones who get off with a warning unless they're doing 20+ mph over.
by oboe on Jul 20, 2012 5:52 pm • link • report
First of all: Speed does not kill. B.S. Plain and simple. It DOES and the research backs that up. This study is old, but I'm not in the mood to look for more recent ones. http://www.nhtsa.gov/people/injury/research/pub/hs809012.html
by thump on Jul 20, 2012 7:40 pm • link • report
"In MD, speed cameras are legal in only 2 places - school zones and highway construction sites. Maryland officials can't throw up a speed camera anywhere they please just to generate tickets."
Yeah, in the state at large, but if you visit Montgomery County (where a sixth of the state resides) you'll realize the county and towns are allowed to put up cameras wherever the hell they feel like. Nearly every municipality utilizes multiple cameras to fill city coffers. Of course the locals have all wised up (even to the small portable ones that are getting more common) and it's mostly out-of-staters that get caught by them.
Personally, I'm indifferent to them, not because they make the roads any safer (that's a laugh), but since I've only been caught 3 times (the first month they were in use) and never since. Plus, we could use the $ from speeding tourists.
Montgomery/MD cameras are friendly compared to DC's since the fine is over $40 for going 12+ over, compared to DC's $100.
by King Terrapin on Jul 20, 2012 7:59 pm • link • report
Get real. Breaking the speed limit is probably the least dangerous crime you can commit on the road. That's why the roads with the highest speeds (freeways) have the lowest accident rates.
Obviously sped is a factor in road safety, but compared to other factors that contribute to accidents the difference between posted limits and actual vehicle speed (if not excessive) has a nearly negligible effect.
by King Terrapin on Jul 20, 2012 8:07 pm • link • report
I couldn't agree with you more. Here's a link of DC speed camera locations:
http://goo.gl/maps/K4qi
Why is it that there are NO cameras in the entire area from Columbia Heights to the Convention Center to Foggy Bottom to Adams Morgan? Isn't that the most ped intensive area in the city?
by Falls Church on Jul 20, 2012 8:47 pm • link • report
I suspect because it's nigh-impossible to speed there.
by Tyro on Jul 20, 2012 10:52 pm • link • report
by Drumz on Jul 21, 2012 12:51 am • link • report
by thump on Jul 21, 2012 8:42 am • link • report
It sounds like the problem that adding traffic lights to the GW parkway and turning the RCP more into a multi-modal street than an express parkway would end up causing more deaths and injuries.
by Tyro on Jul 21, 2012 8:46 am • link • report
There are plenty of times of day when it's possible to speed in those areas and there are still peds around. Also, the map didn't have red light cameras on it but that would be the perfect area to concentrate those cameras.
by Falls Church on Jul 21, 2012 9:39 am • link • report
You Know, I forgot about how they've tunred Montgomery County into DC North since I hardly go there.
As for getting caught by other cameras, it's been several years, because I've been using a radar detector.
Yes, I know, they're "illegal in DC". Well, so should be highay robbery. As long as DC deploys cameras in a predatory manner, I'll use a radar detector.
by ceefer66 on Jul 21, 2012 11:17 am • link • report
As a matter of fact, I have no problem with speed cameras properly deployed - as in school zones and neighborhoods.
But in DC, speed cameras in school zones and neighborhoods where people people live and cross the streets are a rare sight. Installing speed cameras in places like I-295, the I-395 tunnel and the connector from NY Ave to the BW-Parkway and Route 50, then lowering the speed limit from 50-55 mph to 40 mph is PREDATORY.
While we're on this, where are the speed cameras on the commuter routes to/from Virginia. I'll tell you: there aren't any.
I'll say it again: The DC program is predatory and Maryland residents are the prime prey. Give the speed cameras your love and support if you want, but know that I'll be asking my representaves to reject any bill allowing a DC commuter tax as long as Marylanders are the primary prey of the DC speed camera program. I know that I'm far from being alone.
So far, MD and VA representatives have succeeded in prevententing the matter from even get to a vote. As long as DC officials continue to aim speed cameras at MD residents, I hope that continues. I'll certainly be asking MY representatives to see that it does.
"It's about safety". Yeah, right.
by ceefer66 on Jul 21, 2012 11:23 am • link • report
I fully support the efforts to get voting representation in Congress for DC. Voting representation (it's not "voting rights", guys - you already have the right to vote) shouldn't be tied to the DC "government's" performance. The fact that their government does stupid things should prevent DC residents from having a vote in Congress.
That said, raising money by clipping commuters is another matter. As I've said,the predatory deployment of speed cameras on commuter routes amounts to a de facto commuter tax. I would dare say that's been the intent of DC officials all along and there is nothing anyone can say to convince me otherwise. Certainly NOT that it's in the interst of "safety". However, I'll give them credit for successfully brainwashing many into thinking it is.
by ceefer66 on Jul 21, 2012 11:36 am • link • report
"You are saying you are unwilling to pay a tax in a city where you spend most of your time.."
----
No, I'm not. As a matter of fact, I pay taxes on the property I own in DC. I used to live there and I still own the house I lived in.
What I AM saying, is as a commuter from Maryland, I know the REAL reason for deploying speed cameras on 295, 395, NY Avenue, the East Capitol St viaduct - areas that are NOT neighborhoods - and I resent it. And I will ask my representatives in Congress not to allow DC to impose an official commuter tax as long as that situation continues.
And I encourage other MD commuters to do the same.
Does that clear it up enough for you?
by ceefer66 on Jul 21, 2012 12:00 pm • link • report
So what?
I don't get the point. You want to break the law, and DC has put a price on that. And now you complain that you're being discriminated as a Marylander? That's perfectly legal.
Furthermore, what's wrong with predatory ticketing. I find it a great idea to rip law-breakers off through fines. Better than to raise taxes. To me, it's a brilliant way of raising revenue.
Finally, are you gonna ask your representatives to forbid Arlington of enforcing red lights with cameras at the end of Key Bridge, targeting people coming from DC?
by Jasper on Jul 23, 2012 7:04 am • link • report
Or ask them to forbid taxing rental cars and hotels at higher rates than other sales? Isn't that "predatory"?
by David C on Jul 23, 2012 8:26 am • link • report
I travel somewhat, and sometimes the taxes on rental cars and hotel rooms are indeed astonishing. For example, Logan Airport in Massachusetts adds $60 for a one-day compact rental car. It is approaching the cost of the rental.
It is confiscatory and predatory.
by goldfish on Jul 23, 2012 8:57 am • link • report
So you're intelligent, clever, and perceptive enough to just KNOW I "want to break the law" simply because I dislike predatory speed cameras?
You must be a real hoot at parties.
by ceefer66 on Jul 23, 2012 8:20 pm • link • report
Why else do you have an issue with them? You have an issue, because you're worried you might get hit with a fine. If you did not speed, you wouldn't be worried.
Thanks for recognizing my intelligence though. You're very kind and perceptive ;-)
by Jasper on Jul 23, 2012 9:27 pm • link • report
"Why else do you have an issue with them? You have an issue, because you're worried you might get hit with a fine. If you did not speed, you wouldn't be worried."
-------
You know what? You're so determined to be "right" that you're making things up.
Actually, I'm not worried about getting hit with a fine. I know where the cameras are, plus I carry protection for those I don't know about. My problem is with the intent.
Go back and read the comment where I said I actually agree with locating speed cameras where they DO have a positive effect on safety - places like school zones and neighborhoods with lots of pedestrians.
My problem isn't with the cameras. My problem is with how they are used (sidebar: I fully support red-light cameras). My problem is with a city that installs a speed camera on a limited-access road that was built for a safe speed of 70 mph and reduces the speed limit from 55 to 40. That's not in the interest of safety.
Ask a friend who drives to explain it to you and stop putting words in my mouth. It's insulting and makes you look worse than it makes me.
by ceefer66 on Jul 24, 2012 7:39 am • link • report
One more thing: The next time you make accusations, I'm complaining.
by ceefer66 on Jul 24, 2012 7:42 am • link • report
I hope a lot more speed cameras pop up in a lot more places. We'd all be safer if people would just slow down.
by Mike on Jul 24, 2012 10:16 am • link • report
Add a Comment