Posts about Meter Hours

Don't forget that Fenty was supportive of progressive transportation until a campaign donor asked him to kill a planned sidewalk, and then suddenly he wasn't. Or all the development projects that went to poorly qualified developers, or his outright refusal to implement inclusionary zoning. Or Peter Nickles.

The Gray administration made a significant funding commitment to streetcars, and Gray has announced his desire to make DC a platinum-level bicycle-friendly city. On the other hand, he didn't keep Gabe Klein (but elevated his deputy) and his support for cycle tracks is tenuous.

A few comments aside, though, we still don't know if the decision to put L and M street cycle tracks on hold came from Gray, or Bellamy, or someone else. There are even people in the bicycle program at DDOT who aren't very enthusiastic about cycle tracks and are reluctant to move them ahead absent strong support from above.

Or, perhaps they'll move it with strong support from the public. Tommy Wells' chief of staff Charles Allen said they've gotten 1,054 emails supporting the cycle tracks. He's already supportive, but DDOT and the Mayor's office are getting the same emails.

When we got funding restored for streetcars, it wasn't because a bunch of people reacted to the news by saying that they wished we'd elected Kathy Patterson instead; they flooded Gray's office and got the policy reversed.

Before the election, I wrote,

I'm sure I will disagree with some of his decisions. But I disagree with a lot of what Fenty does. If, and when, Gray does something I think is wrong, I'll say so. I'll push him to be the best possible Mayor, to hire A+ people just like some of Fenty's appointments, but without some of the C- people Fenty also has in the mix.

Gray has unfortunately not brought in as many A+ people as I'd hoped, or as many as Fenty did, though he also has fewer C- people. He perhaps has more in the B range than would be ideal.

Ironically, perhaps I think I've become more reluctant to "say so" when Gray has done something wrong because of the childish commenters. Hmm, perhaps they are really Gray supporters trying to dissuade any criticism of the mayor's actions.

Mary Cheh has also been taking a lot of heat for her support for Gray. That seems to have pushed her to become a sort of cross between Tom Smith and Jack Evans, standing up against residents having to endure the foulness of people between the ages of 18 and 22 living in their community and defending the rights of those people who make over $200,000 to avoid sharing anything with people who are losing access to housing and even basic food.

Meanwhile, we've made progress in policy. In the endorsement post, I also wrote,

[Gray] does want to roll back meter hours, though, but I believe after he learns more about parking he'd agree we should only roll them back in some areas and not others.

In the last budget, we didn't hear a peep about this from the administration. Bellamy doesn't want to do it. Jack Evans and Muriel Bowser (Fenty supporters, by the way) were the main ones carrying water for that particular bad idea.

Many transportation subjects aren't among the few issues the mayor cares most about and has the strongest opinions about. He's open to suggestions and influence from his staff and from various groups of residents. We need to remind him that many people strongly support the cycle tracks, or whatever other policy we're discussing, and that it's also the right policy. We can do that more effectively if it's not overshadowed by whining about Adrian Fenty's loss.

No mayor is perfect. Maybe in the future we can elect someone that's better than both Fenty and Gray. We also could definitely have mayors who are far worse than either. We can keep dwelling on the past, or we can fight for a better DC. I'm going to keep my eye on the ball and hope you will too.

Addendum: If you believe that Gray is irrevocably opposed to what we believe and was just lying about it to get elected, then it's understandable that you might not think there's any point in lobbying him. Instead, all we can do is gripe about how it's too bad he was elected. But I don't believe that. Instead, he's open to a lot of things, but not always surrounded by people who push them. That means he needs to hear it from residents, and hear it often.

Another piece of the proposal, also recommended in Shoup's book, is to "unbundle" parking. Housing and offices will be encouraged to offer parking separately from the rent or condo fee. That allows workers or residents to choose between paying for a parking space, or letting someone else rent it. This reduces the demand for parking spaces and for trips taken by car. We strongly support giving people a choice to pay for parking rather than getting it included automatically.

For some districts like Columbia Pike, Arlington is proposing "in-lieu fees." These fees allow a developer to build less than the required amount of parking if they contribute to a public parking fund. Arlington will use this fund to partner with local private garages and ensure that private garages are available to the public. Arlington should ensure that these fees are related to the costs of building additional parking spaces, so that developers face a real choice. Very expensive spaces should not be built (because it's unlikely people will pay enough to use them), but this fee should not allow developers to pay very little to get out of such a requirement.

For off-street parking, although Arlington will continue to have "free or subsidized parking" around retail businesses, there won't be an effort to entirely satisfy that demand, shifting resources "to more efficient and beneficial public amenities". The county is going to take into account available transit, transportation demand management (TDM) strategies and other factors in reducing required parking.

The county will continue to require "by-right" buildings to include the minimum parking spaces required by the Zoning Ordinance. However, based on site conditions, the County may allow reductions below this minimum. Any developer building more than the minimum site needs may be allowed to donate excess parking to other nearby sites to count toward their requirement.

The draft element promotes on-street parking in residential neighborhoods and commercial streets as a traffic calming measure. For single-family homes, residents should be able to park "within a block" of their home, and high-rise apartments should expect guests and service vehicles to have to park "a few blocks away" at peak times.

The resident parking permit program, the first in the nation, will continue much as it exists today. One change recommends implementing a process where residents can have their zone reviewed to reduce its size and eliminate cross-commuting.

Arlington is proposing an official policy discouraging off-street surface parking. "Nowhere in the County should pedestrians have to walk through a parking in order to access a structure," it reads. Parking lots should be underground, structured, or at worst, screened behind or to the side of a building. Buildings, not parking lots, should face the arterial streets.

There's a lot in this plan to like. Arlington's policies are slowly moving away from the old-style "minimum requirements and low-priced curb parking" used in most of the US, and toward parking policies that reflect demand, the cost of supplying parking, and available alternatives. It doesn't eliminate parking minimums or time limits or attempt to push retail parking prices up to the cost of comparable off-street parking, but this is the policy that can pass politically. Sometimes the perfect is the enemy of the good, and the most important policy (getting on-street pricing correct) is in the draft element.

The Arlington County Board wants to hear your comments. Comments should go to Ritch Viola at rviola@arlingtonva.us.