Roads
Eastern Market plaza road diet: Study and experiment, don't presume
The moment the Capitol Hill Town Square team finished their presentation, one woman stood up ramrod straight, her hand in the air, an intense, determined expression on her face. The moderator called on her, and her statement was as sharp as her facial expression. This whole notion of traffic calming on Pennsylvania Avenue at Eastern Market Metro was just the wrong thing for Capitol Hill, based on faulty assumptions, she argued. We don't need traffic to move slower, or put any impediment along this commuter artery from Maryland.
Triptych alternative landscape diagram. Image from Esocoff & Associates.
A number of other residents echoed this sentiment, whether in questions, rudely shouted comments from the back, mutterings not entirely under their breaths from a couple next to me, or applause that broke out after questioners asked hostile questions to the project team Many residents of Capitol Hill seem to have made up their minds one way or the other about this project from the moment they heard about it. In fact, EMMCA declared themselves unalterably opposed to a plan long before the team created a plan. That's too bad, not because we must realign Pennsylvania Avenue around Eastern Market, but because we should decide what to do based on evidence, not dogma, and the evidence isn't all yet available.
Most people instinctively believe that traffic is like a river. There's a bunch of water flowing down from a mountain, and running along a stream. Narrow the stream bed, and the water will run into some other river, or flood your house. If you dam it up, the water backs up to create a lake, and nobody wants a traffic lake. However, traffic isn't like water. It's more like air, which can expand and contract to fill the available space.
It was clear from the questions that many Capitol Hill residents were basing their opinion on the water mental model. If we shrink Pennsylvania from three through lanes to two, where will the cars go? Will they divert through neighborhood streets? Will traffic back up on Pennsylvania? Will slower-moving traffic create more pollution? What about emergency evacuation?
There's no particular reason to believe such a change would bring these effects at all. Some drivers may begin taking the Southeast Freeway instead. Some would switch to transit; Metro remains underutilized on the eastern ends of the Orange and Blue Lines. Some would bicycle, given the bike lane the team has suggested adding on Pennsylvania Avenue.
Or, perhaps, the change would make traffic worse or would divert substantial traffic to neighborhood streets. The transportation consultants from Gorove/Slade don't believe so, and have promised to release their findings. Side streets aren't designed for speed and even a slower Pennsylvania Avenue would be better than slogging through the stop signs. But we can judge for ourselves once we have all the facts. Driving along Pennsylvania from time to time doesn't constitute having all the facts.
Residents near Sherman Avenue in Columbia Heights would love to calm traffic through their neighborhood. Commenter angryparakeet wrote, "I'd like to reclaim [this] neighborhood from MD commuters." It's surprising and sad that some residents of Capitol Hill see efforts to make their neighborhood a more pleasant place as the wrong direction, closing their minds to other possibilities.
Fortunately, we can without spending millions to redo the plaza. Let's install the traffic modifications right now. The "Existing Improved" alternative suggests closing the short segments of D Street connecting to Pennsylvania, putting bulb-outs at many of the corners, and narrowing Pennsylvania by about half a lane, turning the third travel lane into a bike lane. We could implement these changes now with some plastic curbs, posts, and a little paint.
Let's try it out for six months or a year. If the change substantially worsens residents' quality of life, we can reverse it and redesign all three options to retain three travel lanes. If it improves the situation, then we can debate a straight road, an oval, or a rectangle free of the debate over traffic calming.
Excerpt from the traffic plan for the "Existing Improved" option. Image from Esocoff & Associates Architects. Click for full, larger version.
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
- Latest Metro map drafts add Anacostia parks and other tweaks
- Bikeshare is a gateway to private biking, not competition
- Short-term Washingtonians deserve a voice, too
- DC Council makes major policy changes overnight
- Public land deals have both benefits and pitfalls
- Parklets give every block a little park
- Judge denies injunction against closing schools
Traffic seems to flow ok down Penna Ave; I think the key here is to turn the plaza into, well, a plaza, without sacrificing traffic flow -- and I have no doubt that can be done. What a great neighborhood improvement it would be!
by Leigh on Jul 6, 2009 10:55 am • link • report
Heading south, the bus stop can get interesting with multiple buses, and I'd be concerned about motorists on the SE corner of 8th turning right, since it's a bit of a hard corner, and they might be more likely to take that right on red if they don't have the extension of D St. Speaking of which, that extension of D St. can also be dangerous to cyclists...
In short, I'd love to see a bike lane along here, and a lot of the other state streets as well!
by Shawn on Jul 6, 2009 11:05 am • link • report
You have very complete notes from this meeting. Why don't you make the effort to describe more fully the thoughtful expressions of opinion we heard last week?
This website seems to be doing a better job when it comes to capturing neighborhood sentiment at the July 1 community meeting, without all the stereotyping.
http://www.thehillishome.com/2009/07/eastern-market-town-square-designs-unveiled/
by Thomas Riehle on Jul 6, 2009 11:10 am • link • report
This idea of overflow traffic flooding the neighborhood has been a long-term theme on Hill. As I recall the CHRS actually *supported* the Barney Circle Freeway connector, under the assumption it would reduce cut-through traffic on surface streets.
by Paul on Jul 6, 2009 11:12 am • link • report
The traffic/river analogy is even more apt than it might seem.
the popular (?) mental model of river behavior is wrong.
Flood control projects from the Depression maybe the 80s used hard methods to try and tame rivers. Engineers sought to move as much water as quickly as possible, containing rivers with concrete channels and high walls. The LA River south of downtown is perhaps the classic example. It turns out that this strategy brings a host of problems - most notably, it worsens flooding downstream.
Current (equally engineered) solutions focus on soft strategies, like restoring meanders and letting rivers expand into marshy floodplains, in order to spread flood events out over time.
by David R. on Jul 6, 2009 11:32 am • link • report
by David C on Jul 6, 2009 11:35 am • link • report
by Jasper on Jul 6, 2009 11:54 am • link • report
The very best option would be to put a bicycle track right down the median strip of PaAv which is unused and seems be out of the plans for any new streetcar tracks- which used to be there.
Traffic lights at the crossing- as is done in towns like Muenster or Amsterdam would make it even safer.
Bicycle racers and athletic cyclists should NOT BE MAKING THE DECISIONS for all cyclists.
by w on Jul 6, 2009 12:05 pm • link • report
by dcdc on Jul 6, 2009 12:19 pm • link • report
by Sue on Jul 6, 2009 12:21 pm • link • report
by David C on Jul 6, 2009 12:21 pm • link • report
I have no doubt that these folks mean well, but that doesn't mean they're correct. Some of these issues are matters of taste, but many are not -
by Alex B. on Jul 6, 2009 12:26 pm • link • report
I am not a big fan of the inroad bike lanes. I just don't see them being used in DC's patchwork of lanes. I also don't see them being used in NYC either.
I am okay with the narrowing if the goal is to increase the plaza space and the traffic experts say it is okay, but the circle and square ain't doing it for me. Also, the bus routes need to be considered.
by dcdc on Jul 6, 2009 12:28 pm • link • report
Also- if you took the time to check out the historic photos from when the streetcars were running- the trees were there- just not the grass. Grass is not green- grass is SUBURBAN PHONY GREEN.There is no excuse for not either replacing the streetcars or having a bikeway. Bike lanes are too dangerous and will never get as much use as bikeways off of the roads.
Go to Europe and you will see right away what we are talking about.
by w on Jul 6, 2009 12:31 pm • link • report
I am not a big fan of unused green space. There is nothing going on on the meridian. Why not run a bike trail down the middle with trees on the sides? That would be a nice, shady ride.
by dcdc on Jul 6, 2009 12:32 pm • link • report
I'm a Capitol Hill SE resident who's a little late to the game on this one and missed this meeting, but I would like to do what I can to push for smart traffic calming on Pennsylvania. Any recommendations for action on this?
I commute by bike down Pennsylvania SE every morning. Drivers are for the most part courteous, and seem to be used to seeing cyclists on the route. Paul and Shawn are right on the mark though: double parking around eastern market is a huge problem. Cyclists are forced to dodge out into the center (or far left) lane, where drivers are less patient.
I'd love to see a bike lane, provided it's not used as a loading/unloading zone for cars & delivery trucks (see E St NW, "bike lane"), or a cycletrack down the median.
by Colin on Jul 6, 2009 12:32 pm • link • report
I agree. Historically, the median on Pa Ave supported large street trees (not those silly flowering crabapples--too small lollipop trees that look nice for one week a year and don't provide shade) and a streetcar line.
by Paul on Jul 6, 2009 12:39 pm • link • report
This is one layout option we are pushing DDOT to explore on C Street, NE to begin connecting Capitol Hill/Lincoln Park with the Ancostia Riverwalk Trail. Do all-stop intersection signals to let folks move along the trail and in and out of it north and south safely. That prevents most unintended exchanges between motorist and pedestrians/cyclist.
We did some rudimentary renderings; here is one as an example on the cstreetne.blogspot.com - http://cstreetne.blogspot.com/search/label/Existing%20and%20Proposed%20-%20C%20and%2021st%20Street%20Intersection.
Ken
by Ken on Jul 6, 2009 1:52 pm • link • report
@w, I rarely respond to your comments anymore because the way you talk down to people and speak in such dogmatic terms really grates me, but here I go anyway.
I know the median used to be a street car right of way, but now it is not. National Archives used to be a market. Constitution gardens was War Department offices. Istanbul was Constantinople. Things change. Just because there used to be a streetcar there does not mean we have to put one back there. There used to be a streetcar that took tourists out to the Cabin John Hotel. That hotel burned down - should we rebuild the streetcar to that point anyway? I'm not opposed to putting a streetcar back, but I would like to note that we should make our decision based on the future, not some fetishization of the past. And your argument that it used to be a streetcar line so now it MUST be a bike path is missing a step somewhere.
You don't like bike lanes. I get that. But cyclists afraid of the road should not be making bike policy for all bicycle users any more than bicycle racers and athletic cyclists. Bike lanes are not too dangerous - intersections are dangerous - and this trail would have 16 intersections over a 1.4 mile length. If it were used the light cycles would have to be completely changed. How would a car make a turn off of Penn without stopping in the ROW? How will bikes safely navigate the intersections since there will be either stopped cars blocking the path or moving cars? If you build that trail, I guarantee you few cyclists would use it. And you'd have to cut down $40,000 worth of trees to do it. There isn't a need for it frankly.
I too have been to Europe and in all my travels I never saw a bike path built in the median of a street that had an intersection as frequently as once per 0.15 km. Perhaps you could point one out to me (instead of just telling me to go to Europe, which is expensive and time consuming)? I did see people in Europe bike in the road and in bike lanes. And with cars. So I'm curious as to why you can't.
I love bike trails. I like converting railways to bike trails. But in this case it is not appropriate. Not without closing many of the cross streets.
Also, we should get push mowers.
@Paul, I thought those were cherry trees. They will get bigger, right? They're only 10 years old.
by David C on Jul 6, 2009 1:57 pm • link • report
That I could back, but it would take a lot of political will to get done.
by David C on Jul 6, 2009 2:22 pm • link • report
No, they're flowering crabapples and they won't get much bigger. But (mercifully) they don't live very long either. Horrible choice for street trees. The sparse and small canopies do nothing to mitigate the "heat island" effects of all that asphalt. Thanks, NPS. Which brings up another point, the Pa Ave SE median is under Park Service jurisdiction, so good luck getting any transit, bike or pedestrian improvements there.
A few, more appropriate species of red oak trees survive here and there. Plane trees would be a much better choice than those silly ornamental crabapples, and they can survive in a tough urban environment.
by Paul on Jul 6, 2009 4:17 pm • link • report
by dcdc on Jul 6, 2009 4:20 pm • link • report
And I really hate those trees. DC has a lot of low hanging trees that could use a pruning. I'm tall, but I'm not that tall (6'2"), and I hit my head on branches all the time. Those trees in the middle of Pennsylvania are more like big bushes.
by Alex B. on Jul 6, 2009 4:25 pm • link • report
by David C on Jul 6, 2009 4:25 pm • link • report
by Paul on Jul 6, 2009 4:37 pm • link • report
by Alex B. on Jul 6, 2009 4:41 pm • link • report
More and more, though, I'm getting tired of putting up with dangerous streets. You know, there is another form of traffic calming--it's called a shovel at 3 AM. Dig enough holes, and you'll find cars slow right down. Oh, and nobody DIES, unlike when people get hit by cars.
by jenny on the blog on Jul 6, 2009 7:13 pm • link • report
For example, if we decrease the number of lanes from 3 to 2 on a road that averages 2/3 car/(lane*car-length), then we will probably just increase the density to 1 car/(lane*car-length). Beyond that density is at maximum, so decreasing volume(# of lanes), will result in spill-over.
So neither model is always correct, which one is most correct depends on circumstances.
by Patrick C on Jul 6, 2009 8:55 pm • link • report
by Alex B. on Jul 6, 2009 9:40 pm • link • report
by Froggie on Jul 7, 2009 6:54 am • link • report
Because when traffic is heavy it's already calm. It's when you have only a few cars on an eight lane road that you get speeding.
by David C on Jul 7, 2009 9:25 am • link • report
The traffic component should reinforce this behavior by selectively altering street patterns and limiting shortcuts by making certain feeder streets one way. For example, the 900 block of D St. SE should become one way eastbound and the 900 block of E St. SE should be one way westbound. Similar restrictions already exist around Stanton and Lincoln Park.
by Hill Resident in Close Proximity on Jul 8, 2009 4:31 pm • link • report
I don't know how many buses run on average per hour, but it is probably a minimum of 8 in each direction for each line, every hour. That's a lot of bus traffic to drop in front of houses.
(Sadly, I wasn't able to attend the presentation. But I will look up the results and the other cited blog entry.)
by Richard Layman on Jul 8, 2009 5:22 pm • link • report
by David C on Jul 8, 2009 5:43 pm • link • report
by Thomas Riehle on Jul 9, 2009 11:02 am • link • report
Buses run through residential areas all over the city, including the Hill. Why should the 800 block of D St. to the north be immune? Buses roll up and down all day and night on the largely residential 8th St. north of D. Option 3 provides sound remediation, which is more than other Hill residents get from bus noise. This block already gets LOTS of noise in the current configuration
by Hill Resident in Close Proximity on Jul 9, 2009 11:39 am • link • report
That's complete nonsense. When traffic is heavy, you get cars blocking the box and impeding pedestrians with right of way. You get cars aggressively jockeying for every inch of space. You get cars making sudden turns to avoid upcoming gridlock, both lane changes and right turns at intersections. Crossing PA Ave. at rush hour on a busy traffic day can be quite an adventure.
I'm all for narrowing PA Ave, but it doesn't have to be this dichotomy between raceway and parking lot. I'd like to see a plan that ties in any PA Ave reconfiguration with a broader transporation plan for the area, especially the 11 St. Bridge construction and the planned changes to I-295
by Hill Resident in Close Proximity on Jul 14, 2009 10:42 am • link • report
by David C on Jul 14, 2009 11:22 am • link • report
by Independence on Aug 10, 2009 1:39 pm • link • report
Add a Comment