Roads
K Street Option 2 is the "preferred alternative"
It looks like the K Street Transitway will resemble Option 2, the two-lane transitway with two three-lane side roadways, if DC gets the federal funding it needs to build the project.
FHWA published in the Federal Register that they've issued a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) for the "preferred alternative," option 2. I asked DDOT if that means they've chosen option 2, but they replied that they don't want to announce anything prior to the official publication on Friday.
I leaned toward Option 2 as well, because it provides greater flexibility for off-peak loading zones, more sidewalk space, and does move traffic faster. However, Option 2 provides no bicycle lanes or other bike infrastructure.
If Option 2 is indeed the reality, it's all the more important to push for some protected bicycle lanes on I and L, or M, or some other parallel street similar to the new one on 15th and planned for M Street SE/SW.
 | 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
- Bikeshare is a gateway to private biking, not competition
- Short-term Washingtonians deserve a voice, too
- Judge denies injunction against closing schools
- Public land deals have both benefits and pitfalls
- Long-term closures: A solution to single-tracking?
- DC Council makes major policy changes overnight
- PG planners propose bold new smart growth future
by Tim on Dec 17, 2009 10:32 am • link • report
by Ken Archer on Dec 17, 2009 10:49 am • link • report
by Nick on Dec 17, 2009 10:53 am • link • report
Except it leaves hanging the thousands of cyclists who have to use K Street (direct connection to the Capital Crescent Trail), not to mention the hundreds of bike commuters who work on K Street. To leave out cyclists on one of the most important streets in the city goes against a complete streets approach that DDOT should be taking with all major projects.
by jeff on Dec 17, 2009 10:56 am • link • report
Couldn't buses travel "the wrong way" so that we'd have center platforms? If I remember correctly Pittsburgh does this, though for seemingly different reasons.
by Joshua Davis on Dec 17, 2009 11:09 am • link • report
Why don't buses/delivery trucks use the existing side lanes?
by charlie on Dec 17, 2009 11:09 am • link • report
by Tour guide on Dec 17, 2009 11:14 am • link • report
If taking the commuter bus starts to take longer, I will just drive. If others do the same, traffic will only get worse.
Due to it's distance from Union Station, commuter rail is more difficult than buses which can run straight across K Street. Now we are going to forfeit what could be the most efficient way of moving the largest amount of people in and out of downtown and invite people like me to just drive instead.
by Pat on Dec 17, 2009 11:15 am • link • report
by Erik on Dec 17, 2009 11:18 am • link • report
by Ken Archer on Dec 17, 2009 11:19 am • link • report
by Reid on Dec 17, 2009 11:20 am • link • report
Why are people in DC so damn resistant to this wonderful space- saving approach? It does not even seem to be on the planners radars. DC has super wide sidewalks- including those on K street- the sidewalks in this city are much wider than standard Philly or NYC sidewalks. Berlin's sidewalks are only wide on some streets- but it is an old city - and yet they still have bike lanes on sidewalks- with their own traffic signals and separated to protect pedestrians.
The planners need to stop listening to the under 40 male athletic cyclists and look to other cities and countries for models that WORK WELL.
Forcing cyclists to "share the road" might be OK for a wreckless 25 year old skinny guy in lycra- and dinosaur helmet on a carbon fiber bike- but we will NEVER get a large number of people cycling if the planners continue to push for vehicular cycling options.
by w on Dec 17, 2009 11:26 am • link • report
Some places have operated bus in the opposite direction than traffic before.
If the lane was strictly for buses you could do the same here with a just little change to traffic lights at intersections
They should get rid of the northern portion of the park sticking out and make it level with the rest of the road and sidewalk.
by kk on Dec 17, 2009 11:28 am • link • report
Heres an idea maybe charge them a toll for using it or make them pay for part of the construction; the only people benefiting should be locals because of who's paying for it.
If Maryland, Virginia or counties want to pay part fine let them use it.
by kk on Dec 17, 2009 11:34 am • link • report
I see your point and agree somewhat. But, to be completely fair, a large chunk of DC's tax base is corporate tax that is provided mainly by workers from Maryland and Virginia, DC's extremely high restaurant and liquor taxes (also largely funded by suburban workers), and not to mention the sales tax. So while I agree that those who use it should pay for it, I would say that those of us living out of the city already contribute a large percentage of DC's tax base and should be considered when spending that money.
by Pat on Dec 17, 2009 11:47 am • link • report
If thats the case, what about DC residents whom shop in MD & VA you can find DC residents at almost any mall in the area, plus working there and in many other places throughout Virginia & Maryland.
In regard to the tax base if DC was in Maryland or Virginia the same would be happened people will always cross a border to go to a bigger city examples, New Jersey/Connecticut/New York City or even Detroit & Windsor, Canada , and many cities along the US/Mexican Border.
This should be treated as how a bridge connecting between jurisdictions are, or DC could just say no buses are allowed on K Street or only Metro, Circulator buses are allowed on K Street.
by kk on Dec 17, 2009 12:01 pm • link • report
Why exactly, do we have to reduce available street space on places like K street for the occasional biker when you have ~25,000 cars a day use that road?
I work at 15th and K. My office building houses ~1,000 daily workers and has a "bike room" to lock your bikes in, and it has maybe 4 or 5 bikes in it any given day. That number further decreases when the weather turns cold. I will sit outside during lunch for 20 minutes on a beautiful day and see 20 bikers go by, at most.
Heck, even the Bike to Work Day only got 8,000 people to participate, spread across the entire DC Metro (NOVA, Southern MD and the District), in an event planned for a year.
Even if there were a couple hundred bike commuters who use K street EVERY work day of the year as you say (which we know isn't true through the winter), K street is used by a documented ~25,000 vehicles a day.
Ever heard that the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few? This is the perfect application of it.
Narrowing K Street, or any other street for that matter to further inconvenience tens of thousands of people a day, for the benefit of the ~hundred hipsters riding their fixies to work on good weather days is ludicrous and evironmentally wasteful. Bike lanes have their place, but not at the expense of the overwhelming majority.
Cyclists have full use of the existing roads already. There is no need to further worsen the traffic problems by reducing available road volume.
by nookie on Dec 17, 2009 12:03 pm • link • report
The difference between the amount of revenue provided to DC by suburbanites and vise versa is night and day. So let's not argue that. And yes, many cities have border-crossing transportation issues and jointly resolve them for the good of all. When you ride the metro, it doesn't stop at the DC border and then you have to board a new train in Maryland. We should be encouraging DC, MD, and VA to have more cooperation (i.e. the transit board mentioned on this site a few days ago) for the benefit of all because if each state only looked after themselves, there would be a negative spiral effect downward.
I'm just saying that K Street is a major, major transportation project and it is extremely unfortunate that it appears that it will be designed merely for inner-city transit as opposed to the reality that it is mainly used by suburban commuters. The neglect shown to commuter bus routes is just an example. That is not fair and will have negative consequences.
by Pat on Dec 17, 2009 12:22 pm • link • report
I dont really care about the buses and suburbanites- I live in DC and I will take the streetcars, Metro trains and bike/walk.
I see nothing here at all that mentions anything about the streetcar plans which are supposed to include a track that goes from benning Road along H street NE- to H st NW, up NJ avenue, to K street along this route and into Georgetown.
by w on Dec 17, 2009 12:30 pm • link • report
by Alex B. on Dec 17, 2009 12:33 pm • link • report
As far as why restrict traffic on K to build bike lanes despite the thousands of cars, it comes down to if you build it they will come. No bike lanes mean that most people don't feel safe. When there's bike lanes there will be bikers. Part of the objective should be to make driving less convient as that shifts users to other easier modes of travel.
by Cullen on Dec 17, 2009 12:44 pm • link • report
1000 cars=80 buses=6 streetcars
Seeing as the average occupancy in most cars is close to one, the real numbers are even more skewed towards transit.
The goal of traffic planning should be moving people, not cars.
by Reid on Dec 17, 2009 1:06 pm • link • report
by Esmeralda on Dec 17, 2009 1:25 pm • link • report
Unfotunately no, DDOT did not include ridershipss of commuter buses in their K Street study. If somebody has numbers, I am curious to see them. But if you stand on a street corner of K Street between 330-630p you will see what I mean. To Annapolis, MD alone, which is the bus I take there are 19 round-trip buses a day. Let's assume 40 people per bus (the buses I'm on are usually full which would be about 50 people). That's almost 800 people a day on that one route, and one of the smaller route's at that. Now think NoVA, Columbia, LaPlata, etc. You could get so many of those crazy commuter cars of your local roads if commuter buses were given easier access.
DDOT projects that total Circulator ridership in 6 years will be 15,000 (K Street Study). It is a fraction of that right now and only a fraction of that number is on K Street.
I love DC and when I lived here, I hated the suburbanites and the traffic they brought. Stick us all on buses and trains and keep DC nice. Build inner city transit only for local transportation and more of us will drive. That only makes all of us more frusterated. That is why this decision upsets me.
by Pat on Dec 17, 2009 1:58 pm • link • report
That's 4,000 people in 80 buses, or 50 people a bus. I guess that works, if you really pack them in.
But 4,000 people in 6 streetcars is 667 people per streetcar. An 8-car Metro train carries 1,000 people, or 125 per car. You mean to tell me that a streetcar (which is smaller, seeing as how it has to fit on a street and in mixed traffic) can carry more than 5 times as many people as a single Metro car?
by Tim on Dec 17, 2009 2:12 pm • link • report
by jcm on Dec 17, 2009 2:14 pm • link • report
There's no way to get commuter buses into a 2-lane transitway. They'd block up the whole thing for 15 minutes at a time while loading. The 3-lane transitway was designed to try to get the buses in there, but it caused other problems.
by David Alpert on Dec 17, 2009 2:25 pm • link • report
Total Property: 1828M
Total Sales: 778M
Indiv. Income: 1127M
Corp. Income: 220M
There's other stuff, too, but those are the biggies. Total taxes are 4565M.
by jcm on Dec 17, 2009 2:30 pm • link • report
i work at 16th and M. we have 1200+ people in our buildling, and over 200 of them bike to work. my anecdotal evidence shows a much different city than your anecdotal evidence.
by IMGoph on Dec 17, 2009 3:10 pm • link • report
You also don't seem to understand commuter buses. They pick up 5-10 people every few blocks. As far as K Street is concerned, this isn't that different from the Circulator. I'm sorry to not have statistics on this. I'm just speaking from experience. So, it's a bit worse as far as timing goes, but not significantly. But what do I know, I only ride one every day.
And David, commuter buses ARE getting screwed because they are going to be put in the same lane as vendors and waiting cars, which is significantly worse than the current situation (as far as commuter buses are concerned although there are other obvious imporvements). Of course, there will be no standing zones just like much of the rest of the city but we all know that means little to nothing.
by Pat on Dec 17, 2009 3:19 pm • link • report
You're right. I got my math screwed up because I switched my analysis halfway through. The six streetcars (actually it should have been 8) represent 1000 cars filled with the normal amount of passengers (close to one, lets say 1.2). A streetcar can hold 150 people. Thus it takes 8 streetcars to move the same people as 1000 cars normally carry.
It would take 32 streetcars to move the same as 1000 full cars.
It makes me think of something I read recently that apparently came originally from Dave Barry. He suggested that millions, billions, and trillions sound too much alike. Therefore people don't get a thousand times more outraged about a billion dollar loss as they do a million dollar loss. He suggested replacing the words million, billion, and trillion with golf ball, watermelon and hot air balloon. That way people would finally get a real sense as to how much larger a billion is than a million and a trillion from a billion.
So maybe we should start calling buses "12 cars" and streetcars "38 cars".
by Reid on Dec 17, 2009 3:55 pm • link • report
Here are the actual numbers:
Overall Sales Tax: $960 million (14.7% of overall revenues)
of which: 373m comes from retail
24.1m comes from liquor sales
308m comes from restaurants
46m comes from parking
206m comes from hotels
Ok, so which of those categories do commuters pay most into? I'd say parking and restaurants. Commuters don't shop much (not on a work day that is). Nor do they stay in hotels.
So commuters pay mostly into the 354m bucket. I'll be generous and say that 2/3 of that come from commuters (However it's probably lower than that.) That would mean that commuters pay $237m in sales taxes.
That's a whopping 5% of the total revenues.
Nobody's saying we ought to be self-sustaining. Some people are saying, though, that commuters take more from the city than they contribute. Insisting that the roads be tailored to them is an example of demanding more than they're contributing. If this were any other city in the country, you'd be paying income taxes here. So if you really want to get treated the same as a resident, lobby your congressman to allow a commuter tax.
But all that said, I certainly think that accommodations should be made for commuter buses, but I think their interests should be secondary to metrobuses.
by Reid on Dec 17, 2009 4:49 pm • link • report
by Pat on Dec 17, 2009 5:13 pm • link • report
And then what areas have the most bikers those should get the bike lanes.
Build and they will come doesn't always work unless there are a significant amount of people interested in what you propose
Would you build a bike lane for 1 person ?
by kk on Dec 17, 2009 5:15 pm • link • report
Perhaps they're allowed to drive in the transitway but not load/unload there, since they take much more time to do so than your standard city bus or streetcar.
Point being, all forms of transit have different operating characteristics, and just because commuter buses are 'transit' doesn't mean they're a good fit for this particular piece of infrastructure.
by Alex B. on Dec 17, 2009 5:17 pm • link • report
Nice to know that of the entire 8,000 people across the entire DC Metro who once a year get out the message and participate in the bike to work, a whopping 3% of them work specifically in your building. 16% of the people who work in your building live within a easy daily bike commute and your building has enough showering facilites to accomoate 200 people showing in an ~ hour time period. Yep, *suuuuuuuure* they do.
Realistically, how many people do you truthfully think commute to work in downtown DC EVERY day of the year via bike? Ok, how many do you think commute via bike to work just on M street?
Once you've answer that, consider of the approximate 600,000 man-days of jobs worked every single day in the district, 500,000 of them commute to the district from outside of the district. (MD,VA/PA)
Cyclist ALREADY have equal access to the streets. To think that cyclists (of which I am one) should have more than equal access to the limited roads, that the ~ half million people a day who commute into DC is beyond self-obessed.
It's a numbers game, those of the greater number, have the greater need. How many do you think bike to work daily in the district?
by nookie on Dec 17, 2009 5:28 pm • link • report
To me- I would really like to see the DC government make a concerted effort to reduce taxes, and decrease the huge city bureaucracy that we have in DC - and to try to wrest or convince some of these people to move into the city- make it more palatable- safer schools, better servcies, police on the subways [ a HUGE problem that is IGNORED]
and in gereral less of a culture of entitlement for those in public housing who do not want to work who leech off of the middle class [ a big reason why many fled DC in the first place]. crime has gone down in DC- but the city is still asleep at the wheel.
The city needs to be seen as friendly place for families, and for regular people who are not just rich or poor or working for non-profits and living in vegetarian group houses in Adams Morgan or whatever. Regular everyday Joes & Janes need to be made to feel like we are not cash cows for the indigent population of pampered criminals and recidivists that walks the city streets and committs most of the crime and drives up everyone's costs. The city needs to focus their services in another, more positive direction for a change.
And also make it easier for people to live w/o cars.
Much can be done.
Let's start with fixing up K street first- and then let's bring on a separated Blue Line and new streetcars !!!!!
by w on Dec 17, 2009 5:29 pm • link • report
sure, that number's not EVERY day. i don't bike on rainy days. but that still means i bike in 90% of the time.
i work at a progressive organization that employs a lot of young people. since you're at 15th and K, i'm going to assume you have a lot of conservative lawyers who would be afraid to get dirt on their overpriced suits. too bad for you all.
by IMGoph on Dec 17, 2009 5:34 pm • link • report
by David Alpert on Dec 17, 2009 5:35 pm • link • report
NONE.
so we should never have built a single freeway, because clearly, there was no demand for such a thing, and there never would be. you could see it right there, in 1920. nothing ever changes, so don't try to argue with my logic.
QED
by IMGoph on Dec 17, 2009 5:36 pm • link • report
There weren't any freeways by todays definition of one in 1920; plus there were not built with people in mind at first.
by kk on Dec 17, 2009 5:45 pm • link • report
Bicycling and walking are better still.
We need to bring a lot more people back into the city- and put more bikers and walkers on the streets and make it safer for us.
The city needs to advertise that we are a great place to live- for new immigrants, for suburban nuclear families, for elderly, for young people starting out- for more than just Marion Barry's vision of what DC should be.
Move the social services for drug abusers and homeless out into Fairfax and make those imbeciles pony up for a change since they leech off of DC so much.
We need to bring new and lots more people in here and rebuild the entire streetcar network back to what it was in the 1920's before we had freeways.
All of this would be a great start for DC.
by w on Dec 17, 2009 5:55 pm • link • report
by J on Dec 17, 2009 6:05 pm • link • report
Likewise, suburban commuters to New York City contribute in some marginal way to the value of property for taxation and and the taxes on corporate income. Even so, out-of-state commuters there are liable for tax on their personal incomes. Perhaps you can understand why I and many other DC residents find it extraordinarily grating when commuters act as if they were entitled to complain about district policies and services when they pay so little (relative to commuters everywhere else) to the upkeep of the city.
by Steve S on Dec 17, 2009 6:42 pm • link • report
According to the census, 1.16% of DC residents bike to work. There are about 450k working adults living in DC, so that means there are about 5200 DC residents who regularly bike to work.
Of course, these are 2000 numbers. And that's just the point nooky. We make decisions on the use of public works in order to affect people's choices. When you simply let the current demand determine your decisions, you end up with Houston. We build bike lanes because we want more people to bike to work or to play because, among other reasons, bikes take up significantly less space than cars do.
And most of all, the District should do what's best for District residents. And bowing over to every petty demand of suburban commuters who don't pay income tax here is not in the best interest of District residents.
by Reid on Dec 17, 2009 6:43 pm • link • report
if this was some sort of crazy horse-trading maneuver that would be 'a step in the right direction' with guaranteed-in-writing cycletracks on every single other street in DC, then it's possible I could be persuaded that disallowing bikes on K Street is a good idea. really, no -- that would never happen -- i could not really imagine i'd ever be persuaded. there is no sane justification for keeping bikes off of K Street. it's an abomination.
but i am very happy to see that lots of folks are demanding appropriate bicycle infrastructure on K Street -- one of the most important streets in the District. Godspeed!
by Peter Smith on Dec 17, 2009 8:08 pm • link • report
And I understand the city's residents not liking me complaining about lack of services for commuters. I do pay less to the city but I also get less. I'm not asking for an express train out of K Street or a highway through the city. But I do contribute and would like something that would make my 3 hour round-trip commute easier. But mainly, I want to get cars of the roads downtown because that makes it so much nicer. And this K Street design favors individual cars when they had a real opportunity to encourage suburban commuters to condense and free up space for everyone else.
by Pat on Dec 17, 2009 9:32 pm • link • report
by Pat on Dec 17, 2009 9:33 pm • link • report
by David Alpert on Dec 17, 2009 9:34 pm • link • report
by Steve S on Dec 17, 2009 9:46 pm • link • report
by kreeggo on Dec 17, 2009 10:19 pm • link • report
by Michael Perkins on Dec 17, 2009 10:30 pm • link • report
by David C on Dec 17, 2009 11:50 pm • link • report
The transitway passing lane in Option 3 sounds good on the surface but as David alluded to it introduces other problems. Specifically I don't believe commuter buses with long dwell times coexist well with eventual streetcar integration on on the transitway.
Having 3 lanes in each direction on either side of the transitway allows the maximum flexibility and makes sure ROW can be customized to the circumstances. The lane along the curb can be used for valet parking in some areas, commuter bus parking in other areas, taxi stand/delivery truck areas in other sections and in the remaining areas as parking during the non-rush hour periods.
Yes, that does leaves cycling out of the equation K Street. But as I've said I fully support bike infrastructure on the parallel one way streets. There is enough ROW on those one way streets to provide separated cycle-track ala 15th Street NW. That will be safer for the cyclists.
I've read cyclists says "it's not fair to relegate cyclists to a parallel street, some of us have destinations on K Street". Gimmie a freaking break. How many times on this blog have I heard people on this blog say that people who living or work within a mile of metro should take transit and not drive? How many times have I read comments that school children that live within a mile of school should walk rather than be picked up by bus? But cycling advocates with a destination of 16th & K would find it unacceptable to bike on a new I street cycletrack to 16th & I then walk their bike on the sidewalk to one block to 16th & K?
by Paul S on Dec 18, 2009 7:21 am • link • report
K Street is horrible from 17th street to the circle, westward. It has no personality whatsoever, and is nasty to walk. I'm asking in seriousness: will this new plan make the experience even worse? How?
by Jazzy on Dec 18, 2009 7:33 am • link • report
Jazzy: it's a case of if you're crossing K St anywhere between 15th and 20th (except at Farragut Square), you have the 6 lanes of "regular traffic", plus the 2 center transit lanes, for 8 total.
by Froggie on Dec 18, 2009 7:51 am • link • report
by Jazzy on Dec 18, 2009 8:04 am • link • report
While it is much nicer to just think of pedestrians and bicycles and sidewalk cafes, we must think practically and recognize that UPS trucks, office supply trucks, and the nice husband picking his wife up from work are going to dictate what happens in the far lane and it seems as if we haven't found a solution to address that. And before we spend hundreds of millions of dollars, I think we should.
by Pat on Dec 18, 2009 8:05 am • link • report
Trucks should be using the alleys to unload per zoning requirements. Cars are totally unnecessary on K. No need for dedicated buses - K street should have streetcars. There should be streetcars double tracked, then maybe bus lanes, definitely bike lanes, pedestrian areas, that's it. There is zero reason to have private cars or trucks on K street - they can use the adjacent streets where there is room for them to access loading docs in the rear.
DDOT has their priorities totally backwards.
What a joke!
by Lee Watkins on Dec 18, 2009 9:08 am • link • report
Great comments- this is exactly the kind of forward thinking that needs to be happening here in DC.
by w on Dec 18, 2009 9:47 am • link • report
>"In my building, where I work, I am only one of maybe 4 people that bike to work"
ZOMG! "w" actually works? He comments here ALL day. Not even new comments - just recycling his old comments. I assumed he was retired and had lots of free time to waste.
by Jason on Dec 18, 2009 10:09 am • link • report
by dynaryder on Dec 18, 2009 12:04 pm • link • report
that is not a civil kind of comment and I am kind of offended by it.
If you do not have anything nice to say about an individual you should not say anything. It is simply not constructive and does not allow for interesting dialogue or learning to take place.
When I disagree with commentors I always try to keep a civil frame of mind and talk. Maybe you should try to complement one of the commentors on this blog instead of insulting people. It might make you a happier person to be a little more giving / and forgiving.
by w on Dec 18, 2009 5:10 pm • link • report
by Jazzy on Dec 18, 2009 6:27 pm • link • report
by Anders on Dec 23, 2009 5:14 pm • link • report
Add a Comment