Greater Greater Washington

WMATA presents options for SmarTrip negative balances

Thu, 02 Sep 2010 12:56:00 EDT

WMATA raised the hackles of many riders when it announced SmarTrips would no longer go negative. Responding to the outcry, CFO Carol Kissal and her team developed six alternatives for handing the issue, which they presented to the Riders' Advisory Council last night.

Photo by MattHurst on Flickr.

RAC members complimented Kissal and her team on presenting a number of options and seeking rider feedback. While it would have been better to get more feedback before the initial announcement, the followup garnered more praise. The WMATA Board will discuss the issue on September 16th.

To recap, right now SmarTrip cards cost $5. In most places you can buy them, including vending machines at stations with parking and most CVS, Giant and other stores, they cost $10 and come with $5 of stored value. At commuter stores and Metro sales offices as well as some private stores, they go for $5 and a zero balance.

A rider who buys a zero balance card can immediately get on rail or bus and take a trip, going negative. They just have to fill the card up to or above zero before they can get onto transit again using the card. The SmarTrip negative balance option doesn't apply to parking garages; people have to have the parking charge on the card.

Compare this to the paper farecards, which you can't use to get on a bus or train unless it has the minimum fare, and can't exit without adequate fare. If you don't have enough, you have to go to the Exitfare machine, which only take cash and are limited in number.

The WMATA Board asked for the SmarTrip price to go down to $2.50 to make them more affordable for poorer riders. However, officials started to worry. Someone could buy a SmarTrip for $2.50 (at a commuter store or sales office) with $0 value, immediately take a $4.95 long-distance ride or $6 airport bus trip, and throw away the card, basically cheating Metro out of up to $3.50.

Their best guess was that this could cost $1 million a month in lost fare revenue, plus quickly deplete the existing stock of SmarTrips. In my earlier post, I expressed skepticism that there would really be so much cheating, and they wait and see whether there is indeed abuse. They told the RAC last night that this would be an option, and they do have the ability to track how many SmarTrips go negative and then don't get used any more.

Or, they could modify the plan. They devised six options:

A: Wait and see. Drop SmarTrips to $2.50 but don't change the way any systems work. Track whether there is widespread abuse.

B: Rebate. Charge $5 for the card, but automatically give a $2.50 fare credit to the rider after they complete 2 trips. Basically, it's like paying $5 and getting $2.50 of fare on the card, but you have to ride a couple of times first.. This would require some small programming changes which they are researching.

C: No negative. This is the plan they suggested last week. It will require delaying until October so the Exitfare machines can be modified. They actually already have the SmarTrip technology installed, and won't cost WMATA much to reconfigure, but it will take a little time.

D: Don't reduce the price. Keep everything the way it is today, with $5 SmarTrips.

E: Require a minimum fare to enter. Instead of letting a rider enter with $0 on their SmarTrip, require $1.10 or more. That way, it's much harder to cheat. Since $1.10 plus $2.50 card cost is $3.60, only trips over $3.60 could result in a negative balance that costs WMATA if the rider throws away the card. Plus, someone who buys a card would have to put $1.10 on it to maximize cheating, which takes time and effort for little reward.

They estimate that lost revenue would be only $75,000 per month. This option would require some programming change and mean a small delay, probably until December.

F: Cap the negative balance at $2.50. The system could still let people go negative, but only to $2.50 in the hole. More than that and they'd need to use Exitfare. This means nobody can cheat, and most riders won't get stuck because many trips are less than $2.50 and most people who go negative start with some balance on their cards already. However, some people would need to use Exitfare. This would also require a delay until about December.

While I'm not sure I would pick this one, I suggested an option G: Sell all cards with minimum value. As it is, many cards at stores cost $10 for $5 of value, and many stores will simply start selling $7.50 cards for $10 instead. WMATA's old vending machines at stations with parking also can't handle different prices, so they plan to simply load them up with $7.50 cards and keep charging $10.

If all cards cost $5 and came with $2.50 of value, it would be difficult to cheat. If you purchased a card and then took a long trip, the most you could cheat is $1 on an airport bus, which is also possible under today's system. To cheat more, you would need to take more than one trip. This is very similar to option B, except you don't have to wait or take two trips first.

However, the primary purpose of the change was to reduce the barriers for riders with low incomes to get SmarTrips, since some apparently find the initial outlay of $5 to be an obstacle. Paying $5 but getting $2.50 in value could be better, since even if they got a $2.50 card with no value those riders would still have to load some money on at least before the second trip. But it still means that you need $5 right then and there to get a card.

I therefore lean toward options A (just drop the price), E (require some fare to enter), or F (only allow negative up to $2.50). If A, WMATA should pick a backup plan and know how quickly they can implement it. That way, if A does create excessive cheating, they could go right to the backup.

If I had to pick one, I'd say F. It's strictly better than C (no negative), except for the extra two-month delay and unless there's a substantially larger cost to modify the software to disallow negatives over $2.50 versus modifying it to disallow all negatives. But it eliminates the cheating opportunity while still allowing most riders to go negative in most circumstances.

What do you think? I'll compile your suggestions and send them to Ms. Kissal.

24 comments

Is blocking negative SmarTrip balances really necessary? (Aug 25, 2010)
Can SmarTrip work for riders with the lowest incomes? (Jul 15, 2010)
SmarTrip Web site, passes coming this year (Jun 8, 2010)
SmarTrip passes, autoload, Web site now coming mid-2010 (Dec 14, 2009)
What do SmarTrip cards cost? (Dec 12, 2008)

Teens and young adults aren't mosquitoes

Thu, 02 Sep 2010 11:20:00 EDT

by Eric Fidler

If you're under 25, you're not quite welcome in Chinatown. A new "Mosquito" device at the street level of the Metro entrance at 7th & H Streets in Chinatown is emitting shrill noise at 18 KHz, a high frequency that only young people can hear.

Photo by aliciagriffin on Flickr.

Similar devices have been installed in Britain with the same purpose of discouraging young people from congregating outside shops. According to Councilmember Jack Evans, the founder of the Gallery Place development had the device installed on his company's Gallery Place building.

These devices are wrong and most likely illegal as well.

This device was placed at a popular Metro entrance and just a few feet from a popular bus stop. Toddlers, teenagers, and young adults waiting for the bus or emerging from the Metro will now have to endure a shrill screech purposely aimed at annoying them and driving them away. WMATA's Lisa Farbstein voiced concerns about this to the Post.

Though I too am concerned about the incivility and criminal behavior that occurs in Chinatown, police supervision is the proper response. Though I'm 25 now, as a teenager I strongly resented our society's habit of treating young people as criminals and nuisances.

Before the age of suburban development and private shopping mall, cities always included grand public spaces for relaxation and socializing. Sometimes these spaces were formal, grassy parks and sometimes these places were paved plazas like the piazzas in Italy.

Unlike private shopping malls, which serve as the de facto gathering places in most suburbs, public streets, squares, and parks in cities are by their virtue open to the public. With the bright lights, movie theaters, restaurants, and ample seating space on the steps of the museum, Chinatown is a unique attraction for nightlife of all ages. The fact that it sits atop three Metro lines makes it accessible and a convenient meeting place for people coming from all over the city.

Criminal behavior and ill-behaved teenagers do reduce the enjoyment of the space for everyone else, including the vast majority of well-behaved teenagers. This must be addressed through police patrols; Chinatown's popularity and importance warrants a continuous MPD presence the way the NYPD constantly patrols Times Square.

Even still, public spaces by definition are open to the public and must remain that way. Part of the charm of Chinatown is that it is unpredictable and boisterous. Its liveliness, let's remember, is largely owed to the liveliness of excited, but law-abiding, youth.

Just as teens skateboarded in Silver Spring's plaza because they had no better place, if young people are hanging out in Gallery Place, the better approach would be to give them a better place to go that meets their needs instead of just trying to annoy them away somewhere else.

More importantly, this device probably violates the law.

The DC Human Rights Act makes it illegal "to deny, directly or indirectly, any person the full and equal enjoyment of the goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages, and accommodations of any place of public accommodations." (Our emphasis)

Unequal treatment is illegal if it is "wholly or partially for a discriminatory reason based on the actual or perceived: race, color, religion, national origin, sex, age, marital status, personal appearance, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, familial status, family responsibilities, genetic information, disability, matriculation, political affiliation, source of income, or place of residence or business of any individual." (Our emphasis)

Whoever installed this device clearly did so with the intention of driving away young people who have an equal right to be at the Metro entrance. The device's manufacturer doesn't mask the age-discrimination motivation of the Mosquito and even markets it as "a simple, safe and benign way to disperse crowds of anti-social youth." There's no explanation as to how the device knows who is "anti-social" and who isn't. Few people would describe a toddler or infant as "anti-social", but the device doesn't care for such nuance.

The ethical problem with the device is clear: it purposely aims to annoy and deny equal use of public accommodations to law-abiding people solely on account of their age. All insidious forms of discrimination derive from desire to withhold one's goodwill from a person for characteristics that don't merit distinction.

Several papers are reporting the installation, but few are addressing the civil rights aspect of it. Young people are equally entitled to use these public places lawfully and social interaction in the public sphere is a key part of urban life, even if it occasionally gets rowdy. Police patrols are a more effective means of maintaining order in Chinatown as they can address activities that are actually illegal.

The developer probably doesn't care much for the ethics of the matter, but the DC Human Rights Act makes its use illegal. An investigation by the city's Office of Human Rights is a call the developer will hear loudly.

66 comments

Should Chinatown be Times Square? (Mar 10, 2010)
Park(ing) Day reminds us how society shapes public space (Sep 22, 2009)
Making Silver Spring safe for kids and adults (May 27, 2009)
No new subsidized parking in Bethesda (Apr 26, 2008)
Public spaces on public radio (Feb 14, 2008)

Breakfast links: A difference of opinions

Thu, 02 Sep 2010 09:30:00 EDT

by Erik W.

Photo from woodleywonderworks

Tyranny of the minorty: The Examiner's bike-hating and plenty opinionated opinion contributor has moved on to transit hatred in another one of the usual kooky screeds about how any government policy other than building everything for cars, all the time is insane. WashCycle patiently rebuts.

Back and forth on parking minimums : In the most mild-mannered war of words the internet has seen in a while, Cato's Randal O'Toole responds to Donald Shoup's response to O'Toole's original reaction to Tyler Cowen's op-ed about Shoup's book. Did you follow all that? (Michael Perkins)

Political soap opera: If Kwame Brown wins his bid for DC Council Chair, who will run to replace him? Plus, an interesting possibility: Independent-in-name-only Michael A. Brown could switch back to being a Democrat. (Washington City Paper)

Trading barbs: DCist quoted Mayoral candidate Vincent Gray calling parking rates "outrageous" during yesterday's debate, making Matt Yglesias worry Gray might "undo the controversial Fenty-era education and transportation reforms." Gray also called out Mayor Fenty for his sluggish implementation of inclusionary zoning. (DCist, Steven Yates)

The road not driven: EcoVelo has a different way of thinking about bicycling miles that could help cement cycling as active transportation, not just recreation. (Rob Pitingolo)

Ban overboard: The California Senate rejected a statewide ban on plastic shopping bags. Unlike DC's per-bag fee, the law would have banned all single-use plastic bags at groceries, large pharmacies and major retailers that sell food. (USA Today)

Feet in an actual street: An "Open Streets" event in Madison, WI (city of 235,000; metro of 561,000) drew more than 50,000. Compare this with DC's "Feet in the Street," which drew small numbers in a park last weekend because HSEMA's rules wouldn't allow one on a regular street. (Alliance for Biking & Walking)

Have a tip for the links? Submit it here.

26 comments

HSEMA rule prevents K Street Feet in the Street (Jun 24, 2010)
Can you live without disposable plastic? (May 5, 2010)
DDOT proposing K Street "Feet in the Street" (Apr 5, 2010)
Schwartz to run as a write-in; at-large race gets more interesting (Sep 16, 2008)
Post summaries for older posts and emails? (Jul 22, 2008)

You know you've arrived when...

Thu, 02 Sep 2010 08:03:00 EDT

by David Alpert

Greater Greater Washington is the subject of the cover story in this week's City Paper, about how our little ragtag band of bloggers here is getting to be a little bit influential.

Photo by James Calder on Flickr.

If you're visiting us for the first time after finding out about us in the article, welcome! The best way to stay on top of what we're talking about is to subscribe to the RSS feed, sign up for our daily digest email, or follow us on Twitter.

What did you think of the piece?

My favorite bit is Chris Zimmerman's insightful quote about the forces shaping WMATA coverage in the Post and Examiner (though I do think Kytja Weir has been doing a great job), followed by the part about how Richard Longstreth might be able to make a persuasive-sounding case to landmark a pile of dirt. If you don't get the Eleanor Roosevelt reference, it was an allusion to Falkland Chase.

And aw, shucks, Rob Pitingolo.

Is our group too white, as DePillis wonders? It's too bad Dan Reed had decamped for grad school in Philadelphia by the time that Hyattsville meetup happened, else he'd very likely have been there. And we're always happy when Bradley Heard has time to write something. But yes, we're pretty white, as are planners in general, and it'd be really great to increase our diversity.

DePillis is pointing out an issue that I've long known we need to address. Since we don't pay anyone, I'm limited in how much I can influence this. But we're always looking for contributors, of any race, gender, age or other characteristic. The only requirement is quality, and a general fit with our philosophy. Email info@ggwash.org if you'd like to write for us.

Richard Layman also raises a point about the challenge of building relationships with insiders versus attacking them. It's a tough line all journalists walk. In our case, we criticize agencies and officials when warranted, but also try to be be fair and understand the challenges people on the inside face.

When it comes to Jim Graham, I'd just note that I criticized the DC USA parking garage, one of the listed issues, in February 2008, March on bike parking, May twice, June, a New York analogue, March and April 2009 ... you get the idea.

The thing about Jim Graham is that you just have to understand where he's coming from. He's very much a politican, and makes decisions based on what voters want. But that means all you have to do to win is get a lot of Ward 1 voters to support your policy. He also has an absolutely first-rate staffer in charge of transportation, which counts for a lot. Finally, that quote from me at the end of that section is the only one I'd say was a wee bit out of context.

I also have just a few little nitpicks. Remarkably few, actually, given the amount of content in the piece. One of the little Metro-line graphics lists ANCs among the "anti" groups. Sometimes they are anti, but some ANCs are terrific. Last election cycle, a bunch of good candidates won many Ward 3 ANC seats, turning several ANCs from knee-jerk naysayers to constructive participants in neighborhood visioning.

Also, I wish I could take credit for the bag fee, but that one was all amazing legislative legwork by Tommy Wells and his staff.

DePillis's piece is quite balanced, and pretty accurate for an article of its length. As someone who does a fair bit of journalism myself, I know how hard it is to say a lot and be absolutely precise in every tiny, mostly-irrelevant detail.

So what if Drinking Liberally really met in Manhattan, not Brooklyn, or Jaime hadn't quite yet started planning school at the time she started contributing, or if the landmarked Brutalist church at 16th and I is Third Church, not First Church (which is up in Columbia Heights); you're not going to go fundamentally wrong reading it, and DePillis deserves good marks for a tough job well done.

8 comments

Social media enabled instant organizing for streetcars (May 27, 2010)
Graham, Albert did allow several options for public hearings (Jan 8, 2010)
Feature update: More feeds, subscribe without commenting (Dec 13, 2009)
Friday meta-discussion: Education? (Aug 14, 2009)
Council considers some of our revenue ideas (Jul 29, 2009)

Combine the Circulator and Metro maps for visitors

Wed, 01 Sep 2010 15:13:00 EDT

by David Alpert

Visitors to DC generally navigate using the Metro map and a street map. The Metro map has become so iconic that it forms many visitors' mental images of DC. However, that map makes no mention of Georgetown, Adams Morgan, and other major destinations.

The Circulator serves those areas, and one of its roles is to serve as an easier-to-understand, no-change-required tourist bus to the places tourists might go, including the Mall, Georgetown, Adams Morgan, the Capitol, Barracks Row, and the ballpark. However, the Circulator's official map only shows Metro stations, not the lines themselves.

These two maps don't work together well.

To really navigate DC, a visitor would need to look at both maps and figure out how to merge the two. Why make them do this work? Why introduce the potential for confusion and mistakes?

DC should create a merged map.

One side (when the map is printed on paper) should have the well-known stylized Metro layout with the Circulator added in:

Click to enlarge.

Visitors would use this to understand how areas relate to one another and plot transit routes between them. Meanwhile, the other side should use a street-based layout, but including Metrorail lines as well as Circulator lines. Visitors would use that one to figure out where exactly to find a Circulator stop or a Metro station.

This map could go into guidebooks, be handed out in hotels, and be posted on kiosks in visitor-heavy areas. Maybe Metro could even include it, along with the regular map, at some downtown stations. This map could form visitors' new mental image of the layout of DC. Instead of leaving out many important areas, it would incorporate them.

Transportation agencies need to think beyond simply how to showcase their own services. Visitors, residents, and others don't really care which agency runs a service; they care what service gets where they need to go. We need maps that show people the services they might want, tailored to their needs.

22 comments

Circulator now in Google Transit (Feb 22, 2010)
Circulator/Metro map version 2 (Apr 4, 2009)
The new Circulators and the Metro map (Mar 31, 2009)
Circulator thrombosis (Mar 16, 2009)
Jim Graham's northern Circulator (Sep 11, 2008)

For state legislature in Montgomery County

Wed, 01 Sep 2010 12:46:00 EDT

by David Alpert

Unlike the County Council, the state legislature has little day to day impact on shaping Montgomery County. Instead, they decide longer-term big picture issues, like how much funding is available for transportation, and individual delegates and senators also sign on to letters circulated about different issues.

Because the state is involved in transportation funding but much more rarely in land use, from GGW's point of view the the state legislative races primarily come down to the marquee transportation issues: the Purple Line, funding Metro and MARC, widening I-270, and the Intercounty Connector (ICC).

To make decisions in the many legislative races, I've talked with advocacy groups in the county, reviewed responses to questionnaires like ACT's (scroll to the bottom) and pledges like Purple Line Now's, and looked over what letters the incumbents did or didn't sign onto in the last session that related to our issues, such as the letter advocating for more Metro funding, the bad pro-I-270 widening letter, and the good I-270 transit alternative letter.

I've listed the downcounty races first, followed by the other districts.

District 16 (Glen Echo, Bethesda, Rockville Pike) has the western end of the Purple Line, significant bus ridership, a number of Metro stations and the county's most walkable downtown.

Senator Brian Frosh has been a leader on transportation issues, including circulating the letter supporting a transit alternative to widening I-270.

ACT is displeased with delegate Bill Frick's lack of absolute firmness on the Purple Line, and he specifically said he supports the 270 widening. However, he did sign the Purple Line Now pledge, and took the time to send a letter to the National Park Service after reading about a Rock Creek Park issue here on Greater Greater Washington. We feel he deserves another term.

Kyle Lierman and Scott Goldberg are among the many challengers vying for the one open seat or one of the incumbents'. Mr. Lierman's strength mostly comes from family political connections, but he wants to champion the Purple Line, get more funding to Metro, and raise the gas tax.

Mr. Goldberg, whom Cavan interviewed, also strongly supports the Purple Line, definitely understands induced demand, and wants the state to do better to minimize car-dependent sprawl. Either would make an excellent representative for the area.

District 18 (Chevy Chase, Kensington, Wheaton) contains the Town of Chevy Chase and Columbia Country Club, Ground Zero for the Purple Line battle. The political race for Delegate has not disappointed, boiling down largely to a referendum on the Purple Line.

Incumbent Anna Sol Gutierrez and challengers Vanessa Atterbeary and Dana Beyer are running in support of the light rail Purple Line along the alignment selected by the county and state. A strong vote for them, like for Berliner in Council District 2, would send a clear message that voters want to put this vital regional project ahead of local neighborhood obstruction.

Cavan discussed the Purple Line, Smart Growth in Wheaton, budget processes, and more with Ms. Gutierrez, Ms. Beyer and Ms. Atterbeary earlier this summer.

The other two incumbents are Al Carr and Jeff Waldstreicher. Mr. Carr has been a friend to the environment, cycling and transit with the exception of his Purple Line stance. He introduced bills for the bag fee and reforming "accident" language. While we hate to focus exclusively on single issues (and haven't in other races, like Mr. Frick in District 16), the Purple Line is the key place the state government will influence the future of this area in the immediate term, and having a supportive local delegation is important.

Senator Rich Madeleno has not been good on the Purple Line, but has been good on transit funding from the state in general, and is likely to be a key player in advocacy for transportation funding. He's also unopposed.

The controversy over the Purple Line in District 18 is nowhere to be found in District 20 (Silver Spring, Takoma Park, White Oak), where the sitting delegation absolutely supports the Purple Line and is otherwise terrific on practically every single issue.

Senator Jamie Raskin and Delegates Sheila Hixson, Tom Hucker and Heather Mizeur deserve a speedy return to Annapolis. Among many other things, Mr. Raskin was the Senate introducer of the bag fee and Ms. Hixson organized the I-270 transit alternative letter.

District 14 (Burtonsville, Brookeville, Damascus) is one of the more rural districts in the county, with no Metro stations. However, the Intercounty Connector will run through the district's southeastern portion.

Delegate Karen Montgomery deserves to win in her challenge against incumbent Senator Rona Kramer. Ms. Kramer supported the ICC, while Ms. Montgomery opposed it. Ms. Kramer's family includes developers who build sprawling strip malls, and on policy her actions align with theirs. Outside of GGW issues, Ms. Kramer has also taken some very unusual stands for her party, like opposing a progressive income tax.

For Delegate, we support incumbent Anne Kaiser and open-seat candidates Eric Luedke and Craig Zucker. Luedke is even a blogger, having written periodically for Maryland Politics Watch.

District 15 (Poolesville, Barnesville, Clarksburg) is the other rural district. There are no Metro stations and a relatively low proportion of transit use, though MARC's Brunswick line has many stations in this district.

Senator Rob Garagiola and Delegates Kathleen Dumais and Brian Feldman have been reliable supporters of transit funding including Metro and MARC, though in many cases also road construction as well. Mr. Garagiola authored the bill creating a commission to find a new source of transportation funding which Maryland desperately needs.

Aruna Miller and Lara Wibeto are the leading candidates for the third open seat. Ms. Miller is a transportation engineer for Montgomery County DOT, and some who've tangled with them on road design issues have some complaints about working with her. Otherwise, there does not seem to be a strong difference in their answers on the ACT questionnaire.

District 17 (Garrett Park, Rockville, Gaithersburg) has a high-profile contest between incumbent Senator Jennie Forehand and challenger Cheryl Kagan. Advocates on most issues, including on transit and smart growth, have been hard pressed to find any substantive difference between the two. Forehand spoke up strongly for highway widening during the 270 battle, but Kagan isn't really any better.

The delegate seats are all uncontested. James Gilchrist deserves special kudos for periodically taking the bus from Rockville to Annapolis to attend legislative sessions. Kumar Barve was one of two delegates not to sign the "Fair Share for Metro" letter, and signed the pro-highway 270 letter but not the pro-transit alternative.

District 19 (Glenmont, Aspen Hill, some of Olney) is a fairly static part of the County's middle, almost entirely built out with single family suburban homes (including my in-laws') and not changing very much very quickly for better or worse, except for the ICC running through the middle.

Delegate Roger Manno is trying to take the Senate seat from Mike Lennett. On transportation, both have been good, but Mr. Manno does more legwork to make things happen. Advocates say when they visit Annapolis, Lennett might be on their side, but Mr. Manno greets them and asks how he can help. Mr. Manno was the one to circulate the Metro funding letter on the floor. On that basis, Mr. Manno deserves a vote.

Among the delegates, incumbent Ben Kramer is similar to his sister Rona Kramer, including being very pro-road. Advoactes who've talked with the various candidates had good impressions of Sam Arora and Jay Hutchins on style and substance. Mr. Hutchins had excellent answers on the ACT questionnaire, and we like Mr. Arora's issues page. Disclosure: Mr. Arora and I have mutual friends.

District 39 (Montgomery Village, North Potomac, Darnestown) is the suburban area around the City of Gaithersburg, shaped as it is because state law requires district boundaries to respect incorporated city boundaries. It includes the Great Seneca Science Corridor (formerly Gaithersburg West), but the state legislature had little involvement with this issue. If built, the Corridor Cities Transitway will travel through a significant part of this district's western half.

Saqib Ali is trying to unseat incumbent Seantor Nancy King. Most of the differences are stylistic, especially Mr. Ali's much younger age and perceived greater vigor. But advocates who work with the legislature also say Mr. Ali does more grandstanding than actual legislating, and his bills don't advance because he doesn't work them hard enough. His vigor could be more Twitter-based than actual achievement-oriented.

However, Mr. Ali was willing to take a clear stand against widening I-270. He actually publicly renounced the pro-widening letter he himself signed, saying he hadn't seen the 270 part, which was below the pro-Corridor Cities Transitway section of the letter. Maybe it would have been better if he'd read the letter first, but we applaud this action.

Incumbents Charles Barkley and Kirill Reznik have reliably supported transit issues including Metro funding, the Purple Line, and the CCT, including transit alternatives over widening I-270. They deserve reelection. The most viable candidates vying to succeed Mr. Ali are Shane Robinson and Bob Hydorn, whose positions on these issues differ little.

6 comments

For Montgomery County Council (Aug 31, 2010)
Montgomery, Prince George's officials endorse Fair Share (Apr 5, 2010)
ACT creates Montgomery County transit vision (Feb 16, 2010)
ACT produces District 4 scorecard (Apr 15, 2009)
Who's our candidate for Montgomery District 4? (Mar 4, 2009)

For Prince George's County offices

Wed, 01 Sep 2010 11:27:00 EDT

by David Alpert

Prince George's County has a large number of competitive races because of term limits. The County Executive and 5 of the 9 councilmembers are term limited out, creating many open and competitive seats.

These races are also critically important because of Prince George's poor track record of development. Most of the county leaders have focused on bringing large greenfield developments, like National Harbor and Konterra, into the county, while virtually neglecting the areas around the 15 Metro stations and existing communities with transit and retail.

County Executive: Rushern Baker is hands down the best candidate. Mr. Baker has a strong reputation as a capable legislator gained from serving in the Maryland House for 8 years, 4 as the head of the Prince George's delegation.

Mr. Baker is the only candidate who puts development around the county's underutilized Metro stations as a top priority and leading asset for economic development. He also stresses the need to invest in the county's inner Beltway communities.

After education, Mr. Baker puts development around Metro stations as his top priority. He says that the attention that went into National Harbor should go into development around Metro stations and inside the Beltway forgotten areas." He also cites the need for mixed use development at Metro and inside the Beltway to include affordable housing.

Mr. Baker often talks about the County's recent forfeiture of unspent funds that were sent back to HUD and how developers are reluctant to develop in the county due to a perception that they will be "shaken down" by politicians. He calls for leadership that sets a new standard for ethics as critical to attracting quality businesses while helping local businesses thrive. Mr. Baker is the only candidate who can begin to tap the potential of the county and its 15 Metro stations.

County Council: While 5 of 9 councilmembers are term-limited, one of the outstanding members is running for a second term: Eric Olson, representing District 3 (College Park, Riverdale, Lanham-Seabrook, New Carrollton). He has won accolades from all corners.

Mr. Olson is a champion for pedestrian and bicycle issues, and transit-oriented development. He has also been willing to take the unusual and often lonely action of voting against sprawl developments in other parts of the county. He has also advanced the use of density bonuses for affordable housing in the New Carrollton Metro station development plan.

District 2 Councilman Will Campos (Hyattsville, Mount Rainier, Langley Park) also faces nominal competition. In District 4 (Bowie, Glenn Dale, Greenbelt), incumbent Ingrid Turner is running unopposed in the Democratic primary.

District 5 (Bladensburg, Bowie, Landover), incumbent Andrea Harrison won 2 years ago in a special election with the backing of popular now-state Senator David Harrington, who vacated the seat. Many have expressed disappointment with her performance.

Her opponent, Pat Thornton, a long-time county worker who is currently at the Economic Development Corporation, has garnered endorsements due to her experience and knowledge on economic development issues. We agree that Ms. Thornton is the right choice.

District 6 (District Heights, Kettering, Forestville, Mitchellville): In a crowded field, Derrick Leon Davis seems like the best choice as an experienced leader in a variety of positions protecting the public trust, and current chairman of the Maryland Auto Insurance Fund, a state-created agency which provides affordable insurance to hard-to-insure drivers.

Mr. Davis appears to understand the importance of transit-oriented development even though District 6 only has the Largo Metro station. District 6 is directly adjacent to the Morgan Boulevard and Addison Road Metro stations, but these stations lie in Districts 5 and 7 respectively. Davis is on the slate led by Rushern Baker which bodes well for his commitment to a new kind of politics.

Mark Polk, a former police officer turned attorney won the Washington Post's endorsement, and indeed is a person of impressive personal accomplishment and community service. He also expresses an understanding of transit-oriented development but his website emphasizes the priority of attracting high-end retail to the detriment of other priorities.

District 7 (Capitol Heights, Seat Pleasant, Suitland): This race is especially important because this district contains five Metro stations — the most in the county. The field is lackluster but one candidate rises above as the right choice, former Capitol Heights Mayor Darrell Miller. Miller has promoted revitalization of this border town and focus on the Capitol Heights Metro station. Miller brings honest, hardworking constituent-oriented experience as Mayor to the job.

The candidate with the most money by far is labor-backed Karen Toles. While she lacks direct management or legislative experience (other than as a labor lobbyist), she talks about the importance of transit-oriented development and the need to leverage the opportunity of District 7's and all Metro stations in the county. She has made building around the District's Metro stations a priority for her campaign. Her knowledge of land use policy and local government decision-making appears to be a weakness.

District 8 (Camp Springs, Fort Washington, Oxon Hill, Temple Hills) offers a large number of candidates. The southern District along the Potomac contains National Harbor, a portion of the area inside the Beltway, but no Metro stations. Archie L. O'Neil, a retired commander in the County police who now works in human resources for County public safety programs stands out as a good choice and perhaps the only candidate to talk about the need to focus revitalization and job growth inside the Beltway.

Mr. O'Neil's perspective as a veteran police officer in the county perhaps gives him the perspective that preventing crime calls for reinvestment in older neighborhoods rather than the construction of gated communities farther from existing urban areas. He has also talked about the importance of the County's Metro stations as a focal point for creating Prince George's "downtown." He is right, and should be commended for recognizing this, even though none of the Metro stations are in District 8.

District 9 (Upper Marlboro, Cheltenham, parts of Camp Springs and Fort Washington) offers a crowded field but it is essentially a three-way race. Two of the candidates are well-qualified and would move the county forward embracing smart growth and clean government, and who is a well-financed real estate development industry favorite. We support Mel Franklin, a bright, diligent lawyer in the Maryland state's attorney office. He has made smart growth and transit-oriented development central to his campaign. We also like Tamara Davis Brown, a talented attorney with years of civic experience.

The chief rival to Franklin and Brown is the well-funded realtor Sidney Harrison who has collected large sums from development interests. Harrison is likely to continue the sprawl tradition of term-limited Councilwoman Marilynn Bland with further expansion of development in the Rural and Developing Tiers.

State legislature: There are numerous state legislative races and we aren't going to make endorsements in all of them. However, there's one worth mentioning: the District 24 Senate seat (Capitol Heights, Fairmount Heights, Glenarden and Seat Pleasant).

This race deserves comment because a popular veteran Delegate Joanne Benson is challenging long-time incumbent Nathaniel Exum. The Washington Post endorsement of Ms. Benson points out that Mr. Exum's "terrible reputation" which is "richly deserved." Among other actions, Mr. Exum recently attempted to roll back state rules barring direct campaign contributions to Prince George's candidates, as if developers didn't have enough influence. Ms. Benson has been an accessible legislator and responsive to smart growth ideas. We recommend that District 24 voters choose Joanne Benson and retire Nathaniel Exum.

3 comments

For Montgomery County Council (Aug 31, 2010)
What's at stake in the Prince George's County elections (Jul 19, 2010)
Prince George's totally missing the (train) boat (Aug 4, 2009)
National Harbor bus reroute deepens inequality (Apr 16, 2009)
Prince George's great Heights (Dec 31, 2008)

Navy Yard sidewalks get sustainable stormwater systems

Wed, 01 Sep 2010 10:01:00 EDT

by Alex Block

Near the soon to be opened and fantastic Park at the Yards, there's a lot of new low-impact development infrastructure, a series of bioretention areas to capture stormwater.

These are not ordinary tree boxes. Instead of draining into a standard storm sewer, these gutters drain into the tree boxes, where stormwater then naturally drains into the ground instead of into a storm sewer. This reduces the amount of water entering the combined storm and sanitary sewer, and thus can help reduce the number of combined sewer overflow (CSO) events. Since the combined sewer system mixes storm water and regular sewage, substantial rainfall will force the system to overflow into area rivers, dumping raw sewage mixed with stormwater directly into the Anacostia and Potomac.

From the street side:

Storm water will slowly absorb into the ground, aided by the various plants soils that can capture pollutants though the process of biofiltration. Look at other rain gardens and tree boxes under construction - note the drainage layers of soil and gravel to be added.

In this completed rain garden/tree box, note the grade of the soil in the box, below the grade of the curb:

Cross-posted at City Block.

25 comments

How great are tree grates? (Jun 15, 2010)
Growing possibilities: A new census of community gardens (Dec 7, 2009)
Constructive stormwater management proposals emerge in Virginia (Aug 25, 2009)
The growing classroom (May 21, 2009)
Free parking near the Navy Yard given away to commuters (Sep 17, 2008)

Breakfast links: Biking and driving and parking, oh my

Wed, 01 Sep 2010 08:45:00 EDT

by Erik W.

Photo from BeyondDC.

First to share: BeyondDC has photos of the first Capital Bikeshare station which was installed yesterday in Crystal City.

War of words: Mayoral candidates Fenty and Gray will let loose today in another debate, broadcast live on the Washington Post. Tune in at noon. There's also a Ward 6 forum this evening.

What the colors show: Has Fenty better served white areas? It turns out that in the early 2000s (early Williams years), Wards 2 and 3 had the worst 311 response times for city services; in Williams' second term and Fenty's, response times have converged and decreased for all wards. (The Monkey Cage)

Up the road: Baltimore is looking for residents to serve on their transportation Citizens' Advisory Committee.

Struck around the world: GOOD has a neat infographic depicting pedestrian fatalities in cities around the world. Stockholm is the safest with 1.23 deaths per 100,000 residents, while Atlanta, with just shy of 11 deaths, is the most dangerous. DC lands in the middle of the pack with 5.74 deaths.

California dreaming: In an interesting but somewhat confused article, Bill Fulton writes about a couple who has been pushed farther and farther out of the city by the needs of their growing family. Somehow the suburbs allow families to focus on living in a way that cities don't. Living and driving and parking and commuting and mowing and... (California Planning & Development Report)

Driven by economics: Many urbanists point to declining rates of driving in young people as evidence there is a generational shift in housing, transportation and lifestyle preferences. This Grist author thinks it's less normative preferences and more hard and fast economics at work.

A free response: Donald Shoup responds personally to Cato's Randall O'Toole and his un-libertarian parking minimums rant.

Have a tip for the links? Submit it here.

25 comments

Vince Gray talks IZ, New Communities, and rent control (Jul 7, 2010)
DC 2010 budget would end Saturday free parking (Mar 24, 2009)
Will robocars conquer the (transportation) world? (Oct 15, 2008)
Parking countdown #9: Removing minimums is proven elsewhere (Jul 21, 2008)
Visions of an energy-efficient future (May 31, 2008)

I-66 "spot improvements" underway

Tue, 31 Aug 2010 15:47:00 EDT

by Steve Offutt

A "spot improvement" on westbound I-66 between the George Mason Drive and Sycamore Street is underway.

These projects which are essentially short-distance widenings, have been the subject of great debate for more than a decade. VDOT has long wanted to widen I-66 to three lanes in each direction; Arlington, smart growth and environmental groups have been strongly opposed.

The original agreement to build I-66 included an agreement to not widen the highway beyond two lanes in each direction. VDOT settled on a series of "spot improvements," which widen sections of I-66 to three lanes. (Though most residents of Arlington would disagree that these are "improvements" at all.) This section is called "Spot 1."

In February of 2009, the National Capital Region Transportation Planning Board voted to put these projects on hold, only to reverse itself the very next month as Fairfax County put pressure on Supervisor Cathy Hudgins to break with Arlington. Since then, there has been little to stop this project from moving forward, particularly because it has received earmarked funding from Congress that can be used for nothing else.

I-66 looking westbound from Ohio St.

The contract was awarded in May, and construction has begun.

In the photo at right, you can see the (semi) vegetated median between the left shoulder and the Metrorail tracks. It is being partially removed to make room for the additional roadway width.

You can see the demolition of the median in the top image.

The Custis Trail passes under I-66 along this stretch of highway. At the point were it crosses underneath there are three bridges: one for each direction of traffic and one for the Metrorail tracks. The westbound bridge is being widened.

To accommodate pedestrian and bicycle traffic during construction, VDOT has constructed a structure for protection (below). There have been occasional detours while work is being done here. The detour is well marked and only slightly longer.

Once the bridge is widened, there will be less daylight at this point. Although there is some relatively inadequate lighting now, it may need to be upgraded as part of the projects.

According to the project's entry in the 2030 Constrained Long-Range Transportation Plan, the main motives for the project are to reduce "recurring congestion, support the economic vitality of the metropolitan area, increase the safety of all users, increase the accessibility of people and freight, and to promote efficient system management and operation."

Furthermore, the project will ostensibly enable the corridor to serve as an efficient emergency evacuation route. But the suggestion that this will improve the road as an emergency evacuation route is just silly. The capacity of I-66 for evacuation will not be increased by adding a lane for a mile and a half. This language is likely a holdover from the arguments used for widening the entire length of I-66 inside the Beltway.

Once the "spot improvements" are all in place, there's a good chance political pressure to widen the relatively short remaining sections will grow very strong, and VDOT will eventually prevail. It will be interesting to see how long that takes.

42 comments

Zimmerman aces TPB, blocks I-66 widening (Feb 19, 2009)
Submit your comments against I-66 widening (Nov 11, 2008)
Would I-66 widening increase accidents? VDOT doesn't know (Oct 28, 2008)
Widening I-66 is far from insignificant (Oct 6, 2008)
VDOT widening I-66 in Arlington, sweeping environmental impact under the rug (Oct 2, 2008)