Breakfast links: Bikes, cars, hate and crime

by David Alpert • May 12, 2010 9:05 am

San Francisco. Photo by jon|k.

Parking dispute turns into arrow shooting: A Trenton, NJ man shot a neighbor with a bow and arrow over "a parking dispute." None of the news articles illuminate what the dispute was, however. (The Trentonian)

Charges coming for Oxon Hill crash: After doing doughnuts in an Oxon Hill parking lot, a driver drove onto a sidewalk, smashed into various objects, and critically injured a pedestrian. Police are pursuing vehicular manslaughter charges, and dropped some initial, lesser charges so they could re-file more serious ones after the crash report comes in. (Post)

Bike hate in the B's: Michael Dresser's Baltimore Sun column has hosted some vehement bicycle debates recently. An Elkridge women wrote in about the driver who killed her husband in a hit and run, and a Timonium man says Baltimore drivers are "worse than Texas." ... Boston has been having its own debate about whether cyclists need to "earn" respect. (Streetsblog Network)

Private trolleys once again?: Christopher Leinberger suggests bringing back privately-built streetcar lines to connect neighborhoods and reach new areas for development. To fund them, neighborhoods could vote in special real estate tax assessment districts based on the increased property values it would bring. A few changes in federal transportation law could make that possible. (The Atlantic, Ben T)

WMATA back in the hole: A 10¢ fare hike was supposed to close WMATA's FY2010 budget gap, but the snowstorm and related ridership losses have brought it back, and larger than before at $54.2 million. WMATA has no reserve fund left; it could bill jurisdictions for the money over two years. (Examiner)

Ride On back on, parking fees off: The Montgomery County Council voted to keep Ride On service and raised parking fines, but declined to raise parking rates in Bethesda and Silver Spring. The County also cut the pedestrian safety program, which as run by MCDOT wasn't doing much for pedestrian safety anyway. (Examiner)

Pro-transit on the purple route: Last night, the College Park City Council considered a letter to UMD asking them to keep transit vehicles on Campus Drive (Rethink College Park) ... the MTA wants to build a Purple Line stop at Dale Drive and Wayne Avenue in Silver Spring, which Montgomery officials have wavered on. (Gazette)

Have a tip for the links? Submit it here.

16 comments

Tags: links

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
Add a comment »

Private trolley companies were and are a great idea. Didn't the auto companies buy them and shut them down? It would make sense for them to get back into the trolley biz as a way to diversify their companies in the years ahead, and become "transportation" companies, rather than car companies. The Obama admin should use its majority ownership in GM to pursue this as a way to implement its transit- and infrastructure-focused recovery plan (jobs!).

by D on May 12, 2010 9:24 am • link • report

Private trolleys are a bad idea. They'd force local governments into HOT-lane like contracts with ridiculous protection and little risk. Transportation is a public matter and should be handled by the public.

by Jasper on May 12, 2010 9:28 am • link • report

Private trolleys are a bad idea. We have the lowest tax share in 65 years. Stop corporate welfare and make them pay their fair share of the tax burden and use the money to fix Metro and improve transit.

Instead of tolls on I-95, McDonnell could ask Northup Grumman to pay what they'll owe.

by Redline SOS on May 12, 2010 9:32 am • link • report

If these trolleys were run by private companies, why would they be funded by taxes? (Guess I could probably read the article...)

by Nathan on May 12, 2010 9:37 am • link • report

What does Grumman....owe? For I-95? I also don't see how private trolleys would be corporate welfare. Please elaborate.

As it is, limited competition could raise standards across the board. Moreover, State and local governments DO have an obligation to ensure good transit for the public, just as they have an obligation to provide good schools. But in the end the jurisdictions' main role is to fund these efforts. Private trolleys provide alternative methods of delivery in much the same way as charter schools.

Maybe new companies (with new management structures and new labor contracts), would be better positioned to provide more efficient transit service.

by D on May 12, 2010 9:45 am • link • report

The problem is that infrastructure and transportation is an inherently uncompetitive marketplace -- the capital investments are simply too high to have multiple entities providing the same service.

I'd love to have an alternative to Pepco. However, it's totally understandable that nobody else could afford to install a set of wires throughout the city and operate profitably without capturing Pepco's entire marketshare.

by andrew on May 12, 2010 10:22 am • link • report

Somehow, I am not surprised that a 10 cent surcharge isn't helping raise revenue. I've cut back both my Metrobus and Metrorail usage, and am using more circulator, cabs, and blue bus.

I think the key statistic is March, the first full month of the fare surcharge, brought in $1.4 million less than expected. However, April, with at least 3 record ridership days should be ok.

This puzzles me: The DC metro area, outside of DC, has a very good employment rate. DC sucks: 12%. Metrobus is concentrated in DC. I can understand why metrobus revenue is down for the economy. I don't get why metrorail revenue is down. My theory is long distance rail riders (the pricey fares) are back to taking cars with gas prices at $3.

by charlie on May 12, 2010 10:31 am • link • report

Private trollies didn't work before ... and so some people want to have them again ... uh, why?

Let's see what the final figures with tourism add up to be. I know a family of four who came here from out of state during the kids' April school vacation, parked their car out in the 'burbs and took Metro to see many of our sights.

Finally, I don't think gasoline prices have hit their 2010 high just yet.

by Greenbelt Gal on May 12, 2010 10:40 am • link • report

to connect neighborhoods and reach new areas for development

at this point in time shouldn't we be trying to figure out a way to serve already existing development rather than looking for new areas to develop? This just sounds like a sop to developers.

by andy on May 12, 2010 10:57 am • link • report

@Greenbelt Gal -- Trollies DID work. The point is why they worked: living style. Trollies were great when people lived in 1920s-30s row houses in compact neighborhoods, didn't work when highways spread everything out, but will probably work again now that new urbanism is reverting back to compact, walkable neighborhoods. The reason it will work is because tomorrow's cities are more like the ones that used trollies and less like the spread-out ones.

And the article is less concerned with tourists and more focused on serving the needs of permanent residents. Tourists don't typically need to get to the neighborhood dentist, grocery store, or dry cleaners. They only need to go to main attractions, so a larger/regional system like Metro works.

by D on May 12, 2010 11:35 am • link • report

FYI, I was caught part of the news last night and I believe that pedestrian hit in Oxon Hill has died.

by stacey2545 on May 12, 2010 1:39 pm • link • report

This puzzles me: The DC metro area, outside of DC, has a very good employment rate. DC sucks: 12%

Sure I'll take a stab at this

http://spreadsheets.google.com/oimg?key=0AuPLqI8p4QJgdDc0MWkwazJDWTJJV2pUREY1RERLYXc&oid=1&zx=q9d4w4-jidrsk

Here's the raw data:

http://www.clrsearch.com/RSS/Demographics/DC/Washington/Household_Income

by ibc on May 12, 2010 2:35 pm • link • report

@ibc, you completely missed my point. We all know DC has a large number of poor people. And they ride buses. But bus revenue isn't that important to WMATA -- and they are complaining about drops in RAIL revenue.

by charlie on May 12, 2010 3:33 pm • link • report

@ charlie - Cuz a year of high-profile horrific accidents and other safety concerns has absolutely nothing to do with a drop in rail revenue? My guess is that it will take a spike in fuel prices, increased road-congestion, and a new willingness on WMATA's part to be transparent about safety before you see a rise in rail revenue.

by stacey2545 on May 12, 2010 3:56 pm • link • report

Private Trolleys are an OK idea - but most trolley companies were owned by land developers, like Leinberger points out.

The trolleys, especially in LA, were loss-leaders to make streetcar suburbs possible. When the areas reached peak development, or all the lots were sold, the streetcars either were slightly profitable but very susceptible to market fluctuations. Maybe, if like the SLUS in Seattle, they're funded by a BID afterwards, I could get on board. If businesses want this, there'll be noise.

by Neil Flanagan on May 12, 2010 3:58 pm • link • report

@ibc, you completely missed my point.

Guilty as charged. I did get to try out Google's mapping tool in docs, though...

by ibc on May 12, 2010 4:23 pm • link • report