The shift of growth in Virginia will move seats to Northern Virginia, but it will be toward the suburbs, not Alexandria and Arlington.

by David C on Feb 7, 2011 9:32 am • link • report

IIRC McKenna wasn't unique in spotting and publicizing Snyder's attempts to get local governments to guarantee him parking revenue. I first saw it in the Washington Post and they saw through the scheme real easy.

Now whether the W.P. was just following McKenna's lead, I dunno. It sure looked like an obvious get-local-governments-to-help-Snyder-raise-parking-revenues ploy to me.

Around the same time wasn't there federal legislation that stopped the WMATA buses on game days? To me that was far far more insidious than the local government corruption (which I had pretty much expected. Me cynical?)

by B.O. on Feb 7, 2011 9:37 am • link • report

One witness complained that bicyclists create their own problems.

"You don't have a helmet on, you don't make signals when you turn, you don't have a mirror on the bicycle, you don't have a flashlight on the bicycle, but you want to be considered a vehicle that the cars drive in," said Anthony Muhammad, an Advisory Neighborhood Commissioner for ANC 8A in Southeast D.C.

When I take Capital Bikeshare, I signal to indicate turns and merges, which is more than I can say for 99% of the motorists I encounter.

(I also wear a helmet and have a light on the bicycle I'm riding. I don't have a mirror, true, but as far as I can tell motorists use theirs almost as rarely as their turn signals, and someone who doesn't use a mirror has no advantage over someone who doesn't have one.)

by cminus on Feb 7, 2011 9:42 am • link • report

"The shift of growth in Virginia will move seats to Northern Virginia, but it will be toward the suburbs, not Alexandria and Arlington."

Aren't Alexandria and Arlington the suburbs?? :(

by Larsen on Feb 7, 2011 9:56 am • link • report

@Larsen, I think of them as more urban. They're denser, with street grids and transit. Maybe I'm wrong. Is there an official designation?

by David C on Feb 7, 2011 9:58 am • link • report

Arlington calls itself urban and has an urban forestry program.

by David C on Feb 7, 2011 9:59 am • link • report

@David C I've changed it to "urbanized areas" which is what the article really is referring to anyway in terms of the statutory definition of urbanized vs rural.

by Erik Weber on Feb 7, 2011 10:19 am • link • report

@DavidC; absolutely correct. Bad editing by Erik Weber; the headline really is "Virginia Growth strengthens Northern Virginia". I think Arlington grew by 10% vs 13% statewide, not sure about Alexandria, but they are the only really "urbanized" areas in Northern Virginia.

Very unclear if you can call growth in Fairfax county as success for SmartGrowth. The linked article cites growth in Vienna/Fairfax City as evidence of smartGrowth and metrousage and that is a bit of a stretch.

by charlie on Feb 7, 2011 10:30 am • link • report

I think Loudoun grew some ridiculous number like 50%. How is that possible if they do not even have Metro stations out there?

by Peter Griffin on Feb 7, 2011 10:40 am • link • report

Good one, Peter! How DO people get along without trains? LOL.

by NPG on Feb 7, 2011 10:56 am • link • report

Personally, I think about the R-B Corridor in Arlington geographically as being more or less like Connecticut from Dupont out to Van Ness. Ballston's about as far from the Washington Monument as Van Ness is. So...I think of Arlington as urban.

by jnb on Feb 7, 2011 11:24 am • link • report

Maybe Loudon and Fairfax are actually becoming urbanized? Maybe once the traffic becomes so bad, they'll persue trains as a way to stay economically competitive in terms of quality of life issues. A lot of this seems semantic, but if more people are urbanizing the south, doesn't that speak to the liberalizing of the south, instead of Republican dominance from the south's increasing population?

by Thayer-D on Feb 7, 2011 11:28 am • link • report

Thayer-D,
Not necessarily. The south isn't really becoming urbanized so much as it is becoming suburbanized (think Loudoun more than Arlington). The vast majority of the new development is low density and not conducive to transit. Most of the growth in the south looks more like Houston and Phoenix than Northern Virginia. The few municipalities that have new transit systems how low ridership, like Dallas (In Canada, Calgary has a 35-mile system that has 250,000 daily riders whereas Dallas's 72-mile system only garners a mere 50,000 daily riders). In addition, despite a recent increase in the size of the Dallas rail network, the share of people using public transit has actually decreased for both the city proper and the metro area.

Republicans will be able to ride on a wave of demographic shift to the sunbelt for decades to come. In the meantime, most of the people relocating to the south will "go native" and start to act and behave more like southerners, including being Republican voters and favoring smaller government, and roads over transit.

by W. Roberts on Feb 7, 2011 12:05 pm • link • report

W. Roberts,
I was actually playing it out a bit further. 30 years ago, Arlington county was suburban, with horrible traffic. They chose to integrate transit into their communities because they understood it would make their future viable, much like the Silver Line etc. pushing further out for similar reasons. If suburbanization is the precurser to urbanization, rather than the other way around, I'm not sure your vision will bear out. Add to the fact that the hispanic population, especially in the sun belt is exploding, I'm not sure that's a wave conservative nativists will be able to exploit.

The increased density in the Raleigh, Duhram, Chapel Hill triangle has had the opposite effect. It's economically viable regions like those that are making North Carolina and it's ilk vote democratic. Unless the Republican party de-couples itself from the anti-science fear mongers, it won't be winning many long term voters in these urbanizing/suburbanizing regions.

by Thayer-D on Feb 7, 2011 12:19 pm • link • report

Thayer-D,
That depends on whether or not land-use patterns can be altered. Somehow, I think that this will be a difficult thing to change, mainly due to cultural preferences. Part of the reason people moved to the suburbs in general and away from the Northeast in particular was the same--lower housing costs, more space, trees, more privacy, less noise. Urbanizing suburbia would seem to be going against the point.

I don't know much about Charlotte, except that they recently axed a plan to greatly expand their light rail system. See: http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2010/11/18/1846072/cats-will-scale-back-plans-to.html Maybe we need to make a distinction between different parts of the South. North Carolina seems to be trending more "northern", as does Virginia, but if you look at Atlanta, Dallas-Ft. Worth, Houston, Jacksonville, etc. they seem to be following the traditional suburban/exurban growth pattern.

Keep in mind Houston is the largest zoning-free area in the U.S...and it has the same low-density suburban type development as anywhere else. Builders could build "smart growth" type neo-urban communities, but they don't. The market demands single family homes and standard suburban land-use patterns.

The growing Hispanic population doesn't seem to vote in large numbers or with any kind of regularity. So, they enlarge the population numbers for Congressional representation, but are largely irrelevant for political purposes. Who knows? Maybe that will change.

As for the Republicans' anti-intellectual stances, did that hurt them in the last mid-term election?

by W. Roberts on Feb 7, 2011 12:41 pm • link • report

Keep in mind Houston is the largest zoning-free area in the U.S...and it has the same low-density suburban type development as anywhere else.

They still contend with things like minimum parking requirements and the like.

"high growth" areas will always opt for the cheapest models to "grow quickly." This leads to traffic and water shortages, after which those communities (as in NC and NoVA) start to more intelligently and manage their growth because the old model is no longer sustainable.

by JustMe on Feb 7, 2011 12:59 pm • link • report

Loudoun grew by more than 80% I believe in the past decade. PW County grew by 40% or so. Even if the seats shift to places like Fairfax, Prince William and Loudoun counties, it will still lead to a more moderate political makeup and more focus on Northern Virginia issues.

by Vik on Feb 7, 2011 1:02 pm • link • report

Republicans will be able to ride on a wave of demographic shift to the sunbelt for decades to come.

An accurate statement in the early 70s, but the tide has really turned on that one. Keep in mind that NM, NC, VA, and FL went blue while Arizona, even if it stayed red, has basically imploded as a society both economically and politically.

by JustMe on Feb 7, 2011 1:03 pm • link • report

@W. Roberts: having just returned from a planning tour of Charlotte I can tell you that LRT, despite this recent setback, has a bright future ahead of it in that city. There is a lot of TND and TOD in the area just waiting to be connected to the LRT.

I disagree with you about snowbirds going native once they move to the sunbelt. First off, they're not moving if they can't sell their houses. Second, current trends are based on cheap and plentiful fossil fuels. The whole equation changes when people move to fixed incomes in retirement and energy prices become volatile.

by Mark P on Feb 7, 2011 1:21 pm • link • report

You all have some good points, but I think we're all just going to have to wait to see how things change. I think it will have more to do with oil prices than any other factor. The way I see it, the type of "smart growth" policies favored by many neo-urbanists today (exemplified by densification, mixed-use development, being pedestrian friendly as opposed to auto-friendly, bike lanes, having rail transit, etc.) have a steep uphill battle. From my vantage point the model of suburban development doesn't seem to have shifted much in the past 3 decades, except that houses have gotten much larger.

by W. Roberts on Feb 7, 2011 1:44 pm • link • report

NOVA will gain more political representation in Richmond as rural areas will lose some of their power.

I look forward to the republicans in the VA legislator slicing up NOVA into narrow districts that stretch as far as Clarke, Frederick, Warren, Fauqier and Stafford.

Who makes up these maps? Is it just the VA House? Or does the Senate have a vote on it as well?

by Jasper on Feb 7, 2011 1:50 pm • link • report

Even the "houses much larger" is something that has reversed lately. All indications over the past few years are that house sizes are starting to trend downward.

by Froggie on Feb 7, 2011 1:51 pm • link • report

Jasper: both chambers vote on it.

by Froggie on Feb 7, 2011 1:52 pm • link • report

Don't forget the effect of the housing bubble on demographic trends. Building in Prince William and Loudoun counties stopped after 2007. With outer-suburb real estate prices dropping, it isn't going to start again soon. The rising population trend of the last decade in Arlington can be extrapolated forward, but in Prince William and Loudoun it can't.

The shift in relative prices between urban areas and outer suburbs will cause continued demographic shifts as well. This will reinforce the price shifts as outer suburbs become progressively less prestigious.

The demographic shifts will have political consequences. One not-unreasonable scenario for ten years from now is that the most liberal-voting parts of the region will be outer suburbs with lower-middle incomes and large minority populations. The political pattern of Washington would be something like Paris of some years ago - a not-so-far-left city surrounded by a "red belt" consisting of Prince William and Charles Counties, along with South Reston, Laurel, East Columbia, Burtonsville, and Germantown.

by Ben Ross on Feb 7, 2011 1:55 pm • link • report

"From my vantage point the model of suburban development doesn't seem to have shifted much in the past 3 decades, except that houses have gotten much larger."

I agree and I wouldn't expect a different result as long as auto loans are cheap, only a small number of developers have figured out how to build profitable TOD/TND, and most MPOs are still only interested in building roads.

by Mark P on Feb 7, 2011 2:04 pm • link • report

@ Froggie: Thanks. In that case, I'll be waiting for the nasty fight between the two chambers.

by Jasper on Feb 7, 2011 2:11 pm • link • report

Just to clarify - I was using the Parisian phrase "Red Belt" where red means left-wing, not Republican.

by Ben Ross on Feb 7, 2011 2:29 pm • link • report

"One not-unreasonable scenario for ten years from now is that the most liberal-voting parts of the region will be outer suburbs with lower-middle incomes and large minority populations."

Interesting idea. I wonder how that would effect Metro development and expansion. If the new constituency of residents of the city center and inner suburbs have greater economic clout, Washington DC proper and Arlington could end up with, if not Manhattan- or Paris-type subway coverage levels, something much greater than they currently have.

The reduced clout of outer-suburb residents could make expanding Metro to these areas politically difficult, basically just an inverted version of today's situation, where core capacity in DC is neglected at the expense of expansion toward the middle and outer suburbs.

by D.K. on Feb 7, 2011 3:05 pm • link • report

Both Virginia Senate and House vote on redistricting but remember that Virginia's federal congressional districts are still protected to a degree by the Department of Justice under the Voting Rights Act.

by Max D. on Feb 7, 2011 3:08 pm • link • report

Err, at least I think that's the case. Maybe not.

by Max D. on Feb 7, 2011 3:24 pm • link • report

@ DK: where core capacity in DC is neglected at the expense of expansion toward the middle and outer suburbs.

I think the only way to get expansion in DC is to overload the system even more than now. Once the suburbians can't get to DC anymore because the outer lines oversaturate the system, VA and MD politicians will take care of expansion inside DC. It's not fair, but I think this is the only realistic way of getting more capacity in DC.

by Jasper on Feb 7, 2011 3:38 pm • link • report

Jasper, I think that will happen when the Silver Line opens for business in 2013-14, and especially when the Dulles Airport leg of the Silver Line route opens a few years down the road from this.

The need to detach the Blue Line in a separate tunnel (a la David Alpert) and perhaps to do the same to the Yellow Line from the Green Line will become very apparent. Hopefully by then (10 years?) we'll have had a shift in attitudes towards financing public transit and we can get started on construction.

by D.K. on Feb 7, 2011 3:50 pm • link • report

Whats happened to Loudoun in the last 15 years is amazingly bad. Total autocentric planning (or lack thereof) has contributed to some of the the worst traffic in the area. The Town of Leesburg and Route 7 regularly see huge traffic backups because there is literally no other way to get around most of the area. I don't know if the Loudoun politicians have the backbone to push a complete solution. It has been sad to watch it the county fill up and gridlock over the past 20 years.

by Chris R on Feb 7, 2011 4:33 pm • link • report

@ D.K.: I agree. I'd say the need for more capacity is evident now. But there seems to be no political will to get it done. Remember, it took 20 years to get the Silver Line going. What will need to happen is that Federal employees can't get to work anymore because metro (and the roads) is so overcrowded. There will be footstamping, blaming, screaming and then it will happen.

@ Chris R: Whats happened to Loudoun in the last 15 years is amazingly bad.

What's happening in Loudoun is very typical. Republicans in a rural county let the "free market" create sprawl, argue it's good for the development and will increase tax revenu. Once the place fills up, Democrats will be elected to take over and clean up the mess. See Fairfax, PW county, MoCo, and in fact pretty much any rural county destroyed to sprawl.

The only exception I can think of is PG county, but they have the problem that they have a one-party system (like DC) that has led to nepotism, corruption and general incompetence.

by Jasper on Feb 7, 2011 5:56 pm • link • report

Jasper, that's the funny thing about political will. Without, progress seems impossible (HSR today); with it, progress seems unstoppable (Interstate highways circa 1965). I think that one way or another, the Metro core-capacity issue will be addressed. Sooner, hopefully, rather than later.

Regarding Ben Ross's hypothetical demographic shift above, I could imagine having a Paris/New York-like issue (incredible core capacity with few suburban connections, which is why Paris built the RER system) versus a typical American rail transit issue (hub-and-spoke service, with few spokes, and very lonnnng lines servicing suburban commuters).

by D.K. on Feb 7, 2011 6:58 pm • link • report

@ D.K.: Didn't Bill Clinton say something to the effect of: "In America, we try all wrong options first, but we get it right in the end"?

That seems to be very true for urban design in the US.

by Jasper on Feb 7, 2011 9:45 pm • link • report

I remember driving around Loudoun before I was ever interested in Urbanism/transportation and thinking that I would not like to live there simply because even minor roads between neighborhoods and shopping centers needed to be 4-lane "parkways" where you had to drive around your elbow just to scratch yourself.

by Canaan on Feb 7, 2011 9:47 pm • link • report

"efficient" in what way?????? - I don't see the word used anywhere in the article cited from Transport Politic.

by Suburban Not Urban on Feb 11, 2011 12:31 am • link • report