Transit
"That's an old movie": Mayor Williams defends changing city
The District is changing, as people in their 20s and 30s seek to live in walkable urban neighborhoods their parents and grandparents moved away from. Yet the idea that "everyone" will choose a car-dependent lifestyle, and thus all transportation policy should cater to that lifestyle over all others, still persists.
Photo by sbma44 on Flickr.
I recently was invited to watch a panel discussion about DC streetcars at the Cosmos Club, a private social club in Dupont Circle, which included Dorn McGrath of the Committee of 100, former DC Mayor Tony Williams, his planning director Ellen McCarthy, and Downtown BID director Rich Bradley.
The discussion itself covered many of the familiar topics, such as how good the connection will be to Union Station and whether Bus Rapid Transit would work better than rail. The most telling moment happened near the end of the question and answer period, when one attendee sharply criticized the streetcar and, in fact, all projects that don't fall into the 1950s planning paradigm.
"It scares me to think of all the pathetic projects done in the name of becoming a world-class city," he said. These projects just take away from moving cars in the city, he argued, and everyone moves out to a suburban-style neighborhood as soon as they can.
Mayor Williams jumped in. "That's an old movie, man," he said. A few others murmured in agreement. The reality that only the rare person of economic means lives in the District's urban neighborhoods is long gone.
Linda Donavan Harper, head of Cultural Tourism DC, was attending the event as a guest of a member (as I was), and had earlier told everyone about the new H Street heritage trail. She also lent her voice against the sentiment from that member.
Cultural Tourism DC thinks about who their target market is, Harper said. "Who is the cultural tourist? We used to look around and say, it's you, it's me, over 55" year olds, as in fact seniors comprised most of the people in the room. But now, said Harper, it's not. One significant group is international visitors, who expect to ride transit when they visit a city. They don't expect to rent a car and drive.
Another group, more and more, is younger residents who want to make their permanent homes in walkable places. Many people I know want to stay in the neighborhoods where they live; if they leave, the most likely reason is because the quality of public education in a neighborhood they can afford is "not good enough."
As Herb Caudill said, living in urban places doesn't mean abandoning automobiles entirely, but it means having options so that one isn't entirely dependent on them or any other mode of travel. This concept, foreign a generation ago, still persists in many residents' minds.
Of course, no generation uniformly believes one thing, and this is no exception. Many empty nesters are now moving into the city. One woman at the Cosmos Club discussion talked about her experience visiting her son on H Street. Laurence Aurbach, the organizer of the panel (and the person who invited me) has been a smart growth advocate for a long time, and helped design LEED-ND has been supporting smart growth in transportation and planning for the better part of 50 years in San Francisco, Clevleand, and Washington.
We can all can help shake this "old movie" belief by talking to people of all ages and all neighborhoods about the ways our region is changing. It will take time, but as we are seeing with the zoning update, the "old movie" can still wield great force to stop planning and transportation decisions that can move the city and region forward.
Update: The Laurence Aurbach who is involved with LEED-ND is Laurence Aurbach, Jr. (and also in attendance). Laurence Aurbach, Sr., who organized the panel, is his father, and has been a supporter of smart growth for many years in his own right.
 | David Alpert is the Founder and Editor-in-Chief of Greater Greater Washington and Greater Greater Education. He worked as a Product Manager for Google for six years and has lived in the Boston, San Francisco, and New York metro areas in addition to Washington, DC. He loves the area which is, in many ways, greater than those others, and wants to see it become even greater.   |
Comments
- Cyclists are special and do have their own rules
- M Street cycle track keeps improving, draws church anger
- O'Malley announces first projects using new gas tax money
- ICC losing bus service in classic bait and switch
- Can Loudoun grow while protecting its rural areas?
- Judge denies injunction against closing schools
- Silver Spring mall could get massive facelift, new name
by spookiness on Sep 25, 2012 3:20 pm • link • report
by David Alpert on Sep 25, 2012 3:39 pm • link • report
I don't know the best way to help them see that the world has changed. Should we have some kind of an "internship" or "job shadowing" program, where they spend a day or three tied to the hip of someone who lives car-free (or -lite) to show them it's possible?
by Geoffrey Hatchard on Sep 25, 2012 3:51 pm • link • report
by Thayer-D on Sep 25, 2012 3:51 pm • link • report
The fact is, when many currently over 35 turned 16, we couldn't wait to get our drivers licenses and earn enough money to buy a junker. Today, I am so incredibly impressed with the overarching return to the city, with the call for housing and transportation choices. It is the clear path to a truly sustainable future.
by Andrew on Sep 25, 2012 4:11 pm • link • report
by Natitude on Sep 25, 2012 4:23 pm • link • report
This is dangerously close to a straw man argument.
I was never a foreign concept that city living was entirely car-dependent, a generation ago, or ever. People have always understood that in the city, there needs to be alternates to cars.
by goldfish on Sep 25, 2012 5:21 pm • link • report
Urbanized communities can benefit from economies of scale that suburban communities cannot.
It's that simple.
by Capt. Hilts on Sep 25, 2012 5:47 pm • link • report
by Andrew on Sep 25, 2012 7:44 pm • link • report
I'm not suggesting all those in Ward 3 opposing the rewrite are like this. But those who continue to believe in a divided city for the usual reasons will take advantage of those scared (through misinformation)they'll not be able to drive their car and park right in front of Rodman's or the American City diner.
The diversity issue is one that politicians who might oppose the rewrite need to understand - keeping the 1950s rules are anti-diversity. Sad to say, that is one issue politicians in this town understand very well.
by fongfong on Sep 25, 2012 8:05 pm • link • report
As gas gets more expensive and congestion chokes commutes, the suburbs depend on an alternative transportation.
Metro saved the suburbs.
by Tom Coumaris on Sep 25, 2012 9:24 pm • link • report
by Thayer-D on Sep 25, 2012 9:33 pm • link • report
People already commute from Frederick and Hagerstown to Shady Grove to Metro in to work. Soon they'll commute from suburbs in West Virginia to Metro in Loudoun County.
Since Metro auto congestion in DC has increased. Anyone who wants can live in car-centric suburbs and yet ride Metro to work in DC.
Metro was to facilitate commuting from further-out suburbs, the opposite of getting people to live closer to work.
by Tom Coumaris on Sep 25, 2012 11:00 pm • link • report
by TM on Sep 26, 2012 10:59 am • link • report
-----
Yep. That's the way to win people over. Insult them.
Meanwhile, Mayor Williams, thank you for pushing out DC's poor to Prince Georges County. We're happy with the extra crime and additiona; burdens on our social services.
Most of all, thanks for closing DC General and making Prince Georges Hospital DC's de-fact providor for DC's indigent and uninsured. PG hospital has gone broke as a result, but who cares?
We're greatful and we're here to help. So continute to "change the city". We'll be here to backfill for DC's poor while you concentrate on streetcars, dog parks, bike lanes, and density. Maybe we can get our elected officials to send DC a bill. DC can always pay us back out of their traffic camera revenue.
by ceefer on Sep 26, 2012 11:18 am • link • report
by David Alpert on Sep 26, 2012 11:36 am • link • report
I detect a generational divide here. It seems like the younger generation, having discovered the wonders of city living, are lecturing the oldsters about it. Kinda like kids telling their parents about the wonders of sex.
I suggest that the C100 fully appreciates the need for public transportation, and how it contributes to urban living. Please remember that many of the best parts of DC that we enjoy today are due to the efforts of the C100.
by goldfish on Sep 26, 2012 1:19 pm • link • report
So you're line of reasoning is that as DC made itself more attractive as a place to live this has had an effect on the quality of life in PG county.
My question then is: so? What says that any particular jurisdiction has to house all of the poor people and crime? Moreover, to alleviate this problem of yours wouldn't PG county just have to respond in kind by building bike lanes and dog parks that way people from Charles county can start complaining?
by drumz on Sep 26, 2012 1:30 pm • link • report
by Dane on Sep 26, 2012 2:28 pm • link • report
The Committee of 100 is partly responsible for some of the major citizen sponsored pushback that helped make the District the great city it is. As this blog notes, as great as it is, it can and should be greater. This is, in my opinion, where the divide exists. Many Committee of 100 members/supporters are fine with the way things are and do not want any change. Others, including younger residents respectfully believe that the city can evolve in a manner that protects the good.
The zoning re-write, the acceleration of the implementation of the streetcar system, the expanded bicycle infrastructure are among the many elements of this potential change.
by Andrew on Sep 26, 2012 3:57 pm • link • report
If that is so, may I suggest that their reasoning is examined more carefully, instead of reckoning their opposition to this or that project to a general desire for stasis?
by goldfish on Sep 26, 2012 4:10 pm • link • report
But yes, HopeVI displaced a lot of people to PG County from wards 7 and 8. The Gazette ran an incredible story on this probably back in 2004, maybe 2003, two full inside pages, about the impact on PG County. I can't ever find the URL for it though--they change their indexing system often enough to make it impossible to find.
WRT the point that someone made about C100 types also being responsible for saving the qualities of the city that make it attractive to live here, I agree.
The problem is that C100 and other community advocacy groups, in particular preservation organizations, came to the fore during the period of the shrinking city, when the primary objective was stabilizing neighobrhoods and staunching the outward flow of residents mostly (but businesses too) and the decline of the quality of DC government services.
Now that the city has the opportunity to grow, these groups lack the tools and perspectives necessary for being more judicious about how to go forward, how to surgically add density, how to work to reduce car use through TDM, expanded transit, more density, more services and amenities able to survive in neighborhood commercial districts.
At the same time, the SG folks can be so pro-development and lack historical perspective and appreciation for the hard slog members of groups like C100 did for upwards of 40 years--working to keep the city and its neighborhoods viable--long before the johnny come latelies figured out it was cool to live in the city.
I am not hopeful that the various perspectives/stakeholder groups/age cohorts can come to some sort of congruency on views.
So it will continue to be contentious. And it will be interesting to see how neighborhood groups change as the demographics of membership change.
Now, I heartedly recommend that people interested go to national meetings like the National Trust for Historic Preservation in order to learn not just about preservation but about other places, urban revitalization, and other topics. But yes, things are going to change regardless, and it will be contentious while doing so.
by Richard Layman on Sep 26, 2012 7:24 pm • link • report
by Bob on Sep 27, 2012 3:08 pm • link • report
Fenty was right that we need to fix the DC public school system if we want to attract families of middle to high income to the city. Until that happens, we won't see a total shift yet.
by LuvDusty on Sep 28, 2012 3:56 pm • link • report
by Tim Krepp on Sep 28, 2012 4:01 pm • link • report
by pat b on Sep 28, 2012 10:13 pm • link • report
Maybe in some cities, but have you been to Los Angeles lately? Houston? Phoenix? Albuquerque?
Up until 5, maybe 10 years ago, the car was the thing, and the idea of a mass transit system other than a token bus system was a crazy dream.
Unlike some of its more northern urban compatriots (e.g., New York, Boston), DC has always seemed a little more car-centric. Wherein car ownership isn't totally discouraged by existing conditions and far too many people choose to drive. Improving Metro's got to be the first step to reversing this.
by WMATARage on Oct 1, 2012 11:24 am • link • report
by goldfish on Oct 1, 2012 11:33 am • link • report
by overturf on Oct 2, 2012 9:47 am • link • report
Add a Comment