|
Washington DC: Rail transit
Gerry Connolly, Jim Moran push rail extension in transportation bill
Washington Business Journal – by Sarah Krouse Staff Reporter http://washington.bizjournals.com/wa...433600^1839489 Two Northern Virginia congressmen want a bill to extend Metro attached to federal transportation legislation being drafted. Reps. Gerry Connolly and Jim Moran, both Democrats, want Congress to earmark funds for a feasibility study and preliminary engineering for major extensions of the Orange, Blue and Yellow lines. They estimate the study would cost about $20 million. “The point of my bill is to jump-start the discussion about extending these lines,” said Connolly, a former Fairfax County Board of Supervisors chairman. “By the time it’s completed in 2013, the rail to Dulles will have taken 51 years from the first discussion to the first passenger. I don’t want another 51 years before there are more extensions.” Under Connolly’s plan, the Orange Line, which now ends in Vienna, would continue along Interstate 66 to Centreville. The Blue Line would extend from Franconia-Springfield along I-95 to Prince William County. And the Yellow Line, which ends at Huntington, would go to Fort Belvoir and Woodbridge. The Purple Line, still in the planning stages, would cross Montgomery County and move around the Beltway. Connolly, who introduced his bill in March, is working with Moran to persuade other members of Congress to include their earmark in the transportation reauthorization bill, the massive federal transportation law reauthorized every five years. Rep. James Oberstar, D-Minn., chairman of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, is expected to unveil his blueprint for the bill June 9. The current transportation law expires Sept. 30. A major obstacle for Metro extensions is the drawn-out approval process for transit developments, Connolly said. “For transit projects, you have to spend a decade working with the federal government to get approval for environmental standards, feasibility studies and cost effectiveness.” He also noted a sharp drop in federal funding. “The federal government paid for 80 percent of the original Metro system,” Connolly said. “In Dulles, we’ll be lucky if 16 percent of the money comes from the federal government. Rail is never going to get cheaper and it’s carbon neutral, whereas building another road will only add to emissions, so why not encourage more mass transit?” Extending Metro would also clear the roads for people not headed into D.C., said Shiva Pant, chief of staff for the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority, which runs Metro. “Even if you are transit rider in west Fairfax, you still drive or take a bus to the Fairfax station to get to a train,” Pant said. “With the extension, you could get on a train farther west and remove some drivers from the road so that there is better capacity for folks not headed in and out of D.C.” |
It would be absolutely ridiculous to go to the expense and trouble of building Metro to such far-flung and low-density destinations. Not only would it be an outrageous and unnecessary expense, but it would seriously degrade the ability of the Metrorail system to serve the core of the region, considering the system core has such capacity problems already. In other words, we would be spending a whole lot of money to make the system worse.
I am all for rail to places like Centreville, but for goodness sake, match the rail mode to the needs of the corridor. For the same cost of one new Metro extension you could put light rail on every major corridor in Northern Virginia, or you could improve MARC and VRE so they ran at least hourly service all day long. We in the DC region need to step outside the nonsense intellectual box we've put ourselves in that incorrectly says "Metrorail is the only good transit". Given the choice of throwing billions of dollars down the drain for something like a Metrorail extension to Centreville that would ultimately harm the system or spending that money on a whole network of improvements and lines using alternate modes serving dozens of destinations, it would be nothing short of insane to build the Metro. I like Connolly and Moran. They are friends to urbanism and transit. But on this issue they are wrong wrong wrong. Metrorail extensions to distant suburbs is the worst possible way to spend the limited transit dollars that we have. |
I agree that extending metro by adding even more park-and-ride stations in the I-66 median is not desirable.
I could definitely see some Metro expansion in the district and Arlington, as well as the built up areas of Fairfax, Montgomery, and Prince George's counties, but simple extensions of the existing lines further into the suburbs is a bad idea. There are plenty of dense areas much closer in that could use more transit. That would generate way more ridership and smart growth per dollar than running Metro further down the I-66 median to Centreville. |
Exactly. If we had unlimited money that might be one thing. Unfortunately, we don't. We have to prioritize our investments, and putting the very most expensive kind of infrastructure 20 miles from anything urban so a handful of suburbanites can drive to a park and ride a couple of miles closer to their homes than the current park and ride would be a terrible prioritization.
Of course, if we had unlimited money we'd be building maglev subways instead of Metrorail anyway, so even then this would still be a terrible idea. |
The problem (understandably) is a reluctance to do transfers between modes. MARC and VRE have scraped along for years with minimal facilities, so the transfer facilities are terrible. DCites are not used to pleasant or efficient transfers out of the Metro system. I'm thinking of New Carrollton, Greenbelt, Silver Spring, etc - the places where commuter rail and Metro have adjacent stations. Transfers are confusing, hard to reach, and the stations are barren, unpleasant places to wait. Long train headways, as you point out, don't improve the situation.
I agree that VRE is a much better transportation TYPE than Metro, in exactly the corridors that are being discussed (I-66/West, I-95/Southwest). If the DC area continues its most-favored status when it comes to transportation funding, it should invest in DMU or EMU service on the VRE tracks. The Orange Line to Centreville seems like it could be answered better with a BRT network feeding into Fairfax-Vienna Station, and the Blue and Yellow Line extensions seem highly redundant, as they would approach each other near Fort Belvoir. Of these, the most sensible one is Blue Line to Fort Belvoir. It has an existing corridor and it promises to serve a major employment center. But can Metro really serve a dispersed military facility effectively? Perhaps a feeder BRT network, with a dedicated road or dedicated lanes to Franconia-Springfield Station, would be more appropriate. |
Quote:
The only major suburban Metrorail extension I support is Tysons Corner. And luckily, we've got that one under construction. Everything else should be commuter rail or light rail. |
Quote:
However, there's one exception to your rule on suburban expansion that would be good for further down the line. From time to time, a full circumferential Purple Line has been mentioned. Usually it's proposed as an extension of the light rail line, but since that would be 60ish miles long, I can't see how that could possibly work as light rail. It would be best if implemented as a Metro line. There's the temptation to stick to the beltway median since that's the path of least resistance, and there are places where it would make sense (most of PGC) but the primary goal should be to hit all the spots that are (or could easily become) walkable urban nodes, since there's no point to tying a bunch of suburban park and rides together. See this Google Map for an idea of what that might look like. I figured a 60 mile line with 1 stop about every 2 miles for a total of 30 stops. |
A full circumferential Purple Line will have to be light rail, because Maryland is going to build the first phase of it (Bethesda to New Carrollton) as light rail. We're not going to rip out that investment in 20 years just to convert LRT to Metro.
And the length of the line isn't a problem, because no one would be riding it the full 60 miles. No one would ever ride the Purple Line more than about 1/3 of the way around, because any trips longer than that would be easier to make either going through the city or around in the other direction. |
I see no problem with the Purple Line being Light Rail. Paris has been a few (T) circumferential sections as tram and to the best of my knowledge they work fine, mostly because most people aren't going to be riding in a big circle or even arc—most will use it as a feeder service to the Metro lines.
|
Are there any upgrades to the core system that can be made without tremendous expense? I only ever see extensions mentioned, never upgrades to the core.
All of the problems mentioned that would cause problems to Metrorail have been done out here on BART, so they can look across the country to see what happens when you expand endlessly into the hinterlands and woefully underbuild core capacity. Unfortunately, any upgrade to the core of the BART system that would increase capacity in any significant way (fourth track through the Oakland Wye and/or second Transbay Tube) are absurdly expensive - tens of billions. So we're stuck with a system that peaks worse than any other heavy rail system in the US (probably the world), and we won't be able to capture all of those peak riders soon. The operational problems of systems like this are annoying - but the financial problems that result from systems like this are catastrophic. Variable pricing would help, but not nearly enough to fix things. |
Quote:
The big one is the separate blue line, and that does involve tremendous expense, but there are other changes too:
Greater Greater Washington has done a pretty good job of summarizing these plans here. |
The new blue line would cost about $10 billion. We're going to have to do it sooner or later, but for the time being we can get better bang for the buck with modifications to the service (running more blue trains up the yellow bridge) and surface transit improvements like streetcars and express buses.
|
Quote:
This notion of "bridges to nowhere" is stupid, because once the bridge is built, the private sector comes in, builds stuff on the other side, and then the bridge does not go to nowhere anymore. If sufficient demand is present in the market, then development will come to fill the constraints of infrastructure, as society dictates its terms through land use policies. Anyway, in the list of priorities for the DC area, these projects do indeed seem quite low. But to dismiss them entirely seems short-sighted and does not allow for the phenomenon of induced growth, which powered the growth of inner cities and, later, suburbia. Only now are American governments in a "catch-up" mode where investments address existing congestion without providing for future growth. The rise of town centers along DC's Metro lines is an amazing latter-day example of induced growth caused by transit rather than highway. I see no reason why this trend should not continue in a city that has come to regard major TOD as the normal state of affairs. |
The extensions in VA I'd support are Tysons, Ft. Belvoir and to Fairfax Corner. Those areas have potential for dense development and wouldn't simply be commuter shuttles like something in Centreville or Woodbridge would be since they have lots of jobs and capacity to grow. There's a area between 66 and I-95 that's not served by metro, like in the skyline area and further out into Annandale and Burke. Ideally, I think metro could have worked here with the population but we need heavy commuter rail upgrades as well as better local planning. It sucks not a lot can be done for the skyline, landmark and seven corners area though. Maybe streetcar and better bus service.
There's potential for core upgrades as well. Most of them have been highlighted, the Potomac Yards one is probably the most exciting of them right now. The pedestrian tunnels should be built, but in the short-term a software change for metrocard users. Also, the potomac river needs a new tunnel and that'll be very expensive. And areas east of the core, infill stations - perhaps another one in the vicinity of RFK stadium and another on Benning Rd. later down the line. Also homeland security is moving to st. elizabeth hospital campus and it's not in a pedestrian friendly area really. Even later down the line, there could be another station in Anacostia. There's a wide swath of NE that doesn't have any metro, I don't think anything can be done about there, probably better bus service and streetcar. I can't help but wonder IF, someday, G'town gets served by metro. That's not on the horizon but I don't think it can be taken completely off the table as long as money is being thrown around for extensions and with political pressure to get something done for G'town besides a bus considering it'll most likely always be congested. The price is seriously sky-high and there's lots of nimbys but long-term something needs to be done and I think it's either metro or bust for some people even though that's a perfect area for streetcar. In MD, there's some who want a green line extension to BWI but MARC is perfect for that route. The tracks exist, it's the right distance away, there's not currently a lot of development on that path although there's a lot more coming. It's a different situation than metro to Dulles where it's already developed. I know there are plans for infill stations on the red line in the Bethesda-N. Bethesda-Rockville area which are much needed with the density and growth they're going for. Also, in Arlington, there's the Columbia Pike streetcar which will be a big success IMO w/ the way that corridor is developing. And Anacostia has a streetcar under construction and the H street corridor is probably one of the next ones to get tracks put down. I think light rail is the next big thing. We'll have infill and perhaps some extensions for metro, but light rail will do a great job to fill in the gaps. BRT will take a bit longer IMO, I think more upgrades to bus service will probably be pursued first but we need BRT as well. And this can't be understated enough but funding for maintenance and service is critical for this system that's already reaching or had reached max capacity. Considering we don't have a third track for express service or back up means we don't have a lot of room for error. We'll have to be very innovative and efficient and we need maintenance and service funding. Ridership has never been this high as what we're seeing now. |
There could be a time in the future when it makes sense to build more Metro again, but right now what the system lacks is light rail and good commuter rail. Maybe in another 30 years after we've had a chance to bring those aspects of our system up to spec it will once again be worth it to talk about Metro.
|
Well, given the long lead time to plan for these things, I think the time to start the process is now.
Long term, for Metro, I don't want to see the system extend much farther than it already has. I could see extending the Yellow line down Route 1 to Ft. Belvoir, but the other proposed extensions could (and should) all be served by a vastly improved commuter rail system. For Metro, I think the long term goal ought to be to eliminate the areas where multiple lines share the same track. The first priority would be the new Blue line - this would not only add new route miles through DC, but it would also vastly increase the maximum capacity of the Blue and Orange lines through VA and MD. The next priority would be far more difficult - separating the Yellow and Green lines through DC. I think the idea would be to have a new line travel through DC going up North Capitol or 1st St NW to serve the Hospital Center and the MacMillan site, then somehow cris-crossing with the Green line to travel up under Georgia Ave to Silver Spring. Finally, I'd like to see the Yellow and Blue lines separated through Arlington - I'd propose that be done by making the Franconia-Springfield a spur of the Yellow line and having the new Blue line run out under Columbia Pike to Bailey's Crossroads, maybe even Annandale. Planning for this would be with the idea of being a 25-35 year plan. That way, you'd have all the lines on their own tracks, thus adding redundancy to the system, as well as increasing the capacity of the tail ends of each line. For Commuter Rail, I'd start with service upgrades. More frequent headways, easier boarding, weekend and late night service. I'd also look to expand the system - both in length (hitting Richmond, Charlottesville, etc) but also in new routes. I'd want to beef up service so it's more like an S-Bahn system. With that analogy in mind, it's also important to improve the brand - bring MARC and VRe together under one brand - offer through service so you don't have to transfer at Union Station, and try to make it so that people don't just want Metro because that's what they know is good. For Light Rail, I think the current plans are a good start. Many would be duplicated by the Metro extensions I've discussed, so I'd focus on cross-town routes that won't be duplicated first. I'd also be curious about using light rail as more of an inter-urban kind of service. Specifically, I'm thinking about how to link both Baltimore and DC to Annapolis. Baltimore's light rail uses an old rail ROW to get to the airport, and the ROW continues all the way to Annapolis. The DC-Annapolis connection needs a ROW, but I'm curious as to the feasibility of using LRT over longer distances. Cutting that ROW just for commuter rail seems like a waste, but running a more commuter-oriented LRT line from Annapolis to New Carrolton somewhere along the Route 50 ROW is an intriguing idea - long term, with the hope that FRA guidelines might change - perhaps those LRT trains could then just slide on to the NE corridor tracks and roll right into Union Station, too. But that's probably just a pipe dream. |
Metro station in Georgetown
The blog, Georgetown Metropolitan, had an interesting post about where to put a metro station in Georgetown if WMATA ever builds a station there. If a metro station in Georgetown is built, the next step would be to build a light rail line up Wisconsin Avenue to Tenley. This would connect the Blue Line with stations further up the Red Line without having to go all the way to Metro Center. This would also hopefully reduce congestion on Wisconsin Avenue and encourage denser development near the stations. I wrote a paper last year for a course at George Mason looking at this possibility.
Additionally, if a metro station in Georgetown was built, the Whitehurst Freeway wouldn’t be as necessary. Perhaps with the passengers accomodated on metro instead, this elevated freeway could be removed, giving new vitality to K Street. Where Would a Metro Stop Go Anyway? http://georgetownmetropolitan.com/20...yway/#comments While it is now little more than a glimmer in transit nerds’ eyes, the likelihood of a Georgetown metro station getting built is larger than you may realize. On the right is a map that appeared in the Washington Post in 2001. It described long term plans that WMATA was considering for the expansion of the Metrorail system. Those plans called for a splitting of the Orange and Blue lines. The new Blue line would split off from the Orange line at Rosslyn and travel parallel to the Orange line through downtown, finally meeting up with it again at Stadium-Armory. In building this separate Blue line, WMATA would have the chance to remedy the mistake it made decades ago and finally build a Georgetown station. In an act of enormous cart-before-the-horseing, GM wonders: where exactly would this station go anyway? But before we get to that, we need to go back to the 1960’s first. History The first thing to address if you’re going to start talking about the history of Metro and Georgetown is the old canard about why Georgetown doesn’t have a station in the first place. The story goes that in the 1960’s a bunch of rich Georgetowners didn’t want hordes of minorities coming into their neighborhood on the Metro so they successfully petitioned WMATA to nix any plans for a stop. This telling of this story chugs along year-after-year because it fits in with the negative stereotype of a Georgetown resident: rich, racist, and well-connected. Unfortunately for the storytellers, it’s fiction. George Mason professor Zachary Schrag tracked down the true story of why there’s no Georgetown stop. In his definitive history of the building of the Metro “The Great Society Subway“, Schrag writes that while there was some opposition to the building of metro stop in Georgetown from the residents, the engineers never seriously considered building one there. The grade from the Potomac up to M St. was too steep. Moreover, plenty of neighborhoods across the city were not too excited about a metro stop coming into their neighborhood, but it wasn’t out of racism or xenophobia. It was out of a fear of the disruption to business that construction would bring. Indeed many stores in areas like U St. and Clarendon were knocked out of business due to Metro construction. Remedying a Mistake So that’s why we don’t have a Georgetown station, but was that our only shot? WMATA doesn’t think so. In 2001 WMATA recognized that it could not indefinitely send both the Orange and the Blue lines through the same tunnel between Rosslyn and Foggy Bottom. A new crossing would be required to handle the increase in traffic expected over the next couple decades (particularly with the addition of the Silver Line to Dulles and Loundon County). In building a new Blue line parralel and north of the Orange line, we would be afforded an opportunity to finally build a Georgetown station. The Post wrote back in 2001: The suggested 22-mile leg, which is being called the new Blue Line, could include room for 11 new stations. Among them would be a stop in Georgetown — at M Street NW and Wisconsin Avenue — where the idea of a Metro station was shunned a generation ago but is now welcomed as a tonic for parking and traffic problems. [It doesn't help in stopping the urban legend when even the Washington Post keeps repeating it]. What happened to those plans you ask? Money. The new line would cost $6.3 billion to build and WMATA was already running a $5.2 billion shortfall. So the plans simply faded away. That is until last year. Last August WMATA staff gave a proposal to the WMATA Board of Directors addressing the long term structural needs of the system. In those plans was a revived proposal of a split Blue line, including a Georgetown stop. David Alpert at GGW has written extensively about this. But Where? But where exactly would that stop specifically be? In 2001 WMATA suggested M and Wisconsin, and frankly that seems like the most likely possibility. But where would it even fit? GM thought it over and can think of a couple possible locations from Metro exits. They are: Next To PNC Bank: Right now this is parking lot. There seems like there would be adequate room to build an escalator exit here. While no location around here would be without serious complications, this one seems the least complicated. Next to the Canal The modern canopy is unlikely under any situation, by GM threw it in here just for consideration. As for the space itself, there seems to be a decent amount of room for an escalator here, but there may be a lot of complications trying to build so close to the canal. A Bump Out This plan would take out some of the parking spots and perhaps a lane on Wisconsin just south of M. in GM’s opinion, this would probably be a decent trade-off. There is never a ton of traffic coming up Wisconsin from K, and it is hoped that with a Metro there’d be a significant drop in driving anyway. These are just brainstorms. But it does seem that nobody has thought too hard about the location question more specifically than just “M and Wisconsin”. What do you think? Where would you put the entrances? Anywhere else you’d put the station? Maybe down closer to Key Bridge? How about the other direction towards downtown? |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
SmartBike Expansion Gets a Flat (Georgetown Metropolis)
This is from the Georgetown Metropolis blog.
SmartBike Expansion Gets a Flat http://georgetownmetropolitan.com/20...n-hits-a-flat/ "GM has been increasingly excited about the planned expansion of DC’s bike sharing program, SmartBike. As early as last August, just a few weeks after the initial roll-out, DDOT was already talking about expanding the program to places like Georgetown or Capitol Hill. This spring, DDOT filled our heads with visions of 50 stations, then 100. GM was certain that we’d have SmartBike in Georgetown by this Summer. Turns out he was wrong. GM heard through the grapevine that the expansion has hit a major snag. Clear Channel runs the program and does so in exchange for being able to control the advertising in DC’s new bus shelters. That was the original deal. Well it turns out that Clear Channel doesn’t think the deal they agreed to includes running an additional 90 bike stations. So as a result they’re balking. On top of it, District officials are interested in expanding the program to reach Arlington or Alexandria. Since they don’t allow advertising on bus shelters in Arlington, Clear Channel is particularly uninterested in running the program there. So the Plan B is to take Clear Channel out of the equation and bring in a another system that would be run by a multi-jurisdictional public entity (like WMATA). This will obviously take time. GM is extremely disapointed in this because the reports from last spring got his hopes up that he’d soon be able to pick up a SmartBike at Dupont and ride it home. Additionally, if they go with a completely new system, it will add significant delay to the project, and will give the first bike sharing program in the U.S. an air of failure. Moreover, it seems that the District didn’t negotiate with Clear Channel strongly enough. If they anticipated the expansion and got it in the agreement, then Clear Channel wouldn’t be in a position to refuse. The only possible silver lining to this is that it could result in a better system in the end. The biggest fault of the first Smartbike system was that DDOT and Clear Channel didn’t think big enough. Paris’ successful Velib program started off with 750 stations. Now it’s up to 1,450 stations with 20,000 bikes. And it’s extremely popular. GM stopped by Paris during his honeymoon and saw them being used everywhere. SmartBike was a successful proof of concept. Let’s hope SmartBike mark II lives up to its full potential." |
Pretty fair article. I use SmartBike all the time, but it is extremely limited in scope. DC is ready to expand, has the money, and would have more stations functioning by now if not for Clear Channel shirking its side of the bargain (they're adhering to the letter of the law, but only via loophole; they've abandoned the spirit of the agreement).
The good news is that both DC and Arlington have money for bike-sharing that *has* to be spent in the next year or it goes away, so any delays aren't likely to be very long. |
Two red line trains have collided this afternoon on the DC Metrorail system, I guess somewhere in the vicinity of Takoma or Fort Toten. I'm watching live coverage on CNN right now and they're reporting at least two fatalities have occurred.
|
Please direct discussion about the crash to the thread about it in Current Events.
|
Raising tolls on the Dulles Toll Road is an effective way to ensure higher ridership on the Silver Line. Making driving more expensive (or to reflect its actual cost --global warming, congestion, land-use effects, dependence on foreign oil, etc...) is a good method to increase transit ridership.
Fees Likely To Double on Dulles Toll Road by 2012 By Sandhya Somashekhar Washington Post Wednesday, June 24, 2009 http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...303289_pf.html The cost of driving on the Dulles Toll Road is likely to double over the next three years to help fund Metrorail's $5 billion expansion in Northern Virginia, officials with the agency in charge of the road and the rail project announced yesterday. Under the Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority proposal, tolls would go up incrementally, starting in January. It costs 75 cents to drive through the main plaza and 50 cents to use one of the on- or offramps. The proposal, subject to approval by the authority's board of directors, would increase the main toll to $1.50 by 2012, and the ramp toll would rise to 75 cents. Higher tolls have long been planned to help raise money for the 23-mile Silver Line connecting the East Falls Church Metro station with Dulles International Airport and Loudoun County. Construction on the eastern portion, through Tysons Corner and ending in Reston, has begun. That stretch is expected to be operational by 2013. The project is receiving local, state and federal funding, including a $900 million grant from the Federal Transit Administration. But more than half of the cost is expected to be covered by toll road proceeds, essentially ensuring that the tolls will continue to climb beyond 2012. "My concern is not if they raise the toll but how high they raise it," said Fairfax County Board of Supervisors member Pat S. Herrity (R-Springfield). "We don't want to strangle the Dulles corridor. We don't want employers not building around the toll road, and we certainly don't want employees avoiding the toll road because the tolls are too high." Tolls on the eight-lane road connecting the Capital Beltway and the Dulles Greenway last went up in 2005. Since then, control of the road has shifted from the state to the airports authority, which is the governing body of Reagan National and Dulles International airports. That shift was intended, in part, to facilitate the link between toll collections and the Metro project because both are under the authority's purview. But some critics say the arrangement has given too much power to an unelected regional body. Airports authority officials presented the toll plan to an advisory panel of state and local officials. Under the proposal, tolls at the main plaza and the ramps would increase by 25 cents next year; only the main plaza toll would rise thereafter, by a quarter in 2011 and another quarter in 2012. The authority has planned a series of public hearings for this year, and its 13-member board of directors will vote on the matter in the fall. But with so much of the rail project dependent on toll revenue, it is not a question of whether the tolls will increase but whether the changes will take place incrementally or all at once. The large burden on commuters has prompted some area officials to seek additional funding sources. "I would hope that regionally we will press for more federal funding," said Scott K. York (I), chairman of the Loudoun County Board of Supervisors and a member of the advisory committee. The authority's board of directors is expected to give tentative approval to a plan this summer, in part to prove to investors that the board is willing to take potentially unpopular steps to make sure the project is solvent. But some members of the advisory panel say they want to ensure that the authority is not seeking a higher toll rate than necessary. "I think we should evaluate every year whether or not it is necessary to increase the tolls," said Fairfax Supervisors Chairman Sharon Bulova (D), who sits on the panel. |
Lawmaker to seek $3 billion for Metro transit improvements
Quote:
|
You're right, emathias. Write Congress and tell them to treat transit operations the same way they treat highway maintenance.
|
Yes, please do!
|
Well, there are two separate issues here:
1. The Federal role in all transit funding 2. The Federal role in DC transportation. Like it or not, DC is a special case. I'm not going to comment on the specifics of Hoyer's idea, but DC has a lot of special circumstances that no other American city has to deal with. |
Traffic Eases Nationwide -- Except in D.C., Study Finds (Washington Post)
Traffic Eases Nationwide -- Except in D.C., Study Finds
By Ashley Halsey III Washington Post Wednesday, July 8, 2009 http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...l?hpid=topnews Although traffic has lightened up a tad in almost every other major metropolitan area in the nation, the misery index in the Washington area has increased, according to the annual national traffic study released today by the Texas Transportation Institute. Washington continues to rank second to Los Angeles in auto congestion, which causes the average driver on the area's highways and byways to waste about 62 hours a year crawling through traffic, according to the study, which used data from 2007. "Some of that is related to the good general economy in Washington, with the expansion of government and government services," said Tim Lomax, a research engineer for the institute and co-author of the study. The study is the latest validation of the Washington area's traffic problems and raised questions about whether the region's current political and economic focus will work. The area has initiated some of the most expensive and controversial road projects in its history, including the new Springfield interchange, the new Woodrow Wilson Bridge, the HOT lanes on the Capital Beltway in Virginia, the planned widening of Interstate 66 in Virginia and the Intercounty Connector being built in Maryland. Experts agree that no single approach -- building more roads or commuter rail lines -- will reverse the trend. They say it will require political courage to do the unpopular and a public willingness to sacrifice a little and, perhaps, pay more. "The best solutions are going to be those in which actions by transportation agencies are complemented by businesses, manufacturers and commuters," Lomax said. "The problem is far too big for transportation agencies alone to address it adequately." Washington area drivers wasted an additional three hours in the car compared with the previous year, the study found. Houston and Philadelphia, which remained the same, were the only other major metropolitan areas where traffic did not improve. Factoring in the price of gas and lost productivity, Lomax's study concludes that sitting in traffic cost the Washington area almost $2.8 billion in 2007. Ninety million gallons of gas and 133 million hours went to waste. The annual cost nationally was $87.2 billion, with 2.8 billion gallons of gas wasted, and people spent 4.2 billion hours in traffic purgatory. Lomax used Federal Highway Administration data that included information gathered through 24-hour monitoring of highway systems. The study would appear to conflict with a regional report last year, done through the use of 80,000 aerial photos, which showed that congestion had eased somewhat since 2005. "They were seeing the beginnings of the recession," said Ron Kirby, transportation planning director for the Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments, which conducted the regional study. "Our work is a bit more recent, in 2008, and the recession was more thoroughly underway. But I don't take issue with the rankings. Whether we're second to Los Angeles, or third or fourth, we're right up there with the worst." Kirby and Lomax agreed that once the economy picks up, so will traffic congestion. "The solution isn't to have high unemployment forever," Lomax said. The federal stimulus act gives Washington, Maryland and Virginia a boost of $1.3 billion in transportation funding, which will come to the region in the form of orange traffic cones as scores of major arteries are overhauled. Sometimes something as simple as doubling the number of lanes on an off-ramp can eliminate a bottleneck backing traffic up on a major highway, Kirby said, pointing to recent improvements on a Beltway off-ramp near the American Legion Bridge. But bigger changes bring greater results. For example, Washington commuters often travel east to west, with thousands of drivers from Maryland heading to jobs along the Dulles corridor and in Tysons Corner that were developed a generation after the housing was built to the east. Relocating people where the jobs are, or creating jobs where the people are, would alleviate congestion. "We can't resolve that by building more [highway] capacity so that more people can commute from east to west," Kirby said. Another congestion reliever is "pricing" the commute, Kirby said. Already planned for the Intercounty Connector, Shirley Highway and the Dulles Toll Road, this system would allow variable tolls to skyrocket in special high-speed lanes when congestion builds, encouraging people to avoid the expensive commuting hours. Combine that with plans to extend Metrorail to Dulles and to build a Purple Line north of the city, and congestion could drop another notch. Kirby would like to see high-quality bus service using the new high-speed lanes. Traffic also could be eased if jobs were relocated near outlying Metro stops so that people could reverse commute from the District to the suburbs. "The region's doing a good job when it comes to providing alternatives," said Stewart Schwartz, executive director of the Coalition for Smarter Growth. "We need to do more of it." |
Aging Red Line to Get $177 Million Overhaul (Washington Post)
Aging Red Line to Get $177 Million Overhaul
Metro Rehab to Begin Early Next Year By James Hohmann Washington Post Staff Writer Friday, July 10, 2009 http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...070902967.html Metro's Red Line riders aren't likely to get relief from what has become a painful commute anytime soon. The transit agency is planning to begin a major overhaul of the line in early 2010 that will last years. The $177 million project, intended primarily to rehabilitate the oldest and busiest part of the aging rail system, was already in the works before the June 22 crash that killed nine and injured 80. Yesterday, Metro officials told a board committee that they might shift some funds to areas identified by federal investigators looking into the cause of the accident. The current spending plan covers some work on train control systems, an area being probed by the National Transportation Safety Board. The plan is expected to be approved by the full board Thursday and includes: -- New escalators at the south entrance of Dupont Circle. -- Rehabilitation of the platforms at Shady Grove and Rockville. -- Track repairs from Grosvenor-Strathmore to Medical Center. -- Upgrades to the train power system and automatic train controls. -- Modernization of air conditioning and ventilation equipment. -- Retrofitting tunnel ventilation and fire equipment. -- New escalators, a staircase and a canopy at Foggy Bottom station on the Orange Line. The first phase will focus on the area of track between the Dupont Circle and Silver Spring stations and will take 48 months to complete, said Metro spokeswoman Taryn McNeil. Single tracking, when trains share one track, would begin as early as 8 p.m. Sunday through Thursday. During those hours, Red Line trains normally run about 15 minutes apart. David Couch, who is in charge of Metro's infrastructure projects, told board members nervous about delays that he thinks crews can keep the interval between trains from growing much beyond that. The section of track between Judiciary Square and Farragut North would have longer delays, and he said Metro would wait until 10 p.m. to start work there. Metro General Manager John B. Catoe Jr. acknowledged after the meeting that the planned work will probably lead to longer headways between trains. The price tag of the revised proposal is about $80 million more than an estimate Metro board members saw last summer. Originally, the Red Line rehabilitation was going to cost $96.2 million. However, the agency added projects on other lines and additional platform and track work. Some Metro board members, supportive of the renovations, expressed concern about committing to spend money before the NTSB notifies the agency of its findings. "We're shooting our shot here, and it better be well-aimed," said D.C. Council member Jim Graham (D-Ward 1), Metro board chairman. Catoe insisted that the maintenance work is critical. "It's like I have a leak in my kitchen, and it's flooding the floor, but I'm not going to fix that yet because I need to find out what's happening to my electrical system. I have to fix that leak, and then when I find out what it's going to cost to do that electrical system, I have to make some other priorities within my budget to be able to fund that." The money will come mainly from Metro's capital reserves and about $34 million in federal stimulus funds. Separately, board members expressed frustration that Metro staff was not able to clearly explain the additional protection a sister system has to address "flickering" track circuits, a malfunction that appears to be at the heart of last month's crash. The Bay Area Rapid Transit system installed a backup tool in its train protection system shortly after BART service began in 1972 "for basically resolving the issues that WMATA is facing," BART spokesman Linton Johnson said last week. Metro does not have the same kind of tool, but it does have "diagnostic tools," said Metro rail chief Dave Kubicek. Asked whether Metro could have prevented the crash if it had something similar to BART's system, Metro officials said they did not know. "I want to commend you," Graham told Kubicek. "You should be a lawyer." Later, Catoe said he will rely on a review by an independent team of signal experts for recommendations on any safety upgrades. |
Green-Light the Purple Line (Washington Post)
Green-Light the Purple Line
Maryland Gov. O'Malley should endorse light rail without delay. Sunday, July 12, 2009 Washington Post http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...071102333.html THE JOKE in suburban Maryland is that everyone has an opinion about the Purple Line. In the next few weeks, at least, only one person's matters. Gov. Martin O'Malley (D) is expected to decide on the specifics of the long-planned transit project, including its route and whether it should be bus rapid transit or light rail. It should be an easy call. The county executives, county councils and planning boards of Montgomery and Prince George's counties favor light rail and agree on the general alignment: from Bethesda to New Carrollton along the existing Georgetown Branch railroad right of way. The National Capital Region Transportation Planning Board, which coordinates transportation projects in the Washington area, also voted unanimously for light rail. There's a reason for the broad support: Light rail is sturdier, will attract more riders than bus rapid transit and will deliver them to their destination more swiftly. The last spasms of opposition come mostly from Chevy Chase, where elected officials have spent hundreds of thousands of dollars to defeat light rail and are now threatening legal action. They contend that light rail is too expensive to win federal funding, that a key study of the project is skewed against bus rapid transit and that light rail would ruin the Capital Crescent Trail. Some advocates of Baltimore's Red Line project also fret that the Purple Line would compete for the same federal dollars. Let's dispel the myths: -- Yes, light rail is more expensive, but the Purple Line has one of the highest ridership estimates of transit projects in the country and would be a top candidate for federal funding. Maryland should try to secure federal dollars for light rail first; if that fails, there's always the option to downgrade to bus rapid transit. -- If anything, the study in question, known as a draft environmental impact statement, shortchanges light rail. The report's ridership estimates end at 2030; presumably, light rail will operate long past that and continue attracting riders. -- The Capital Crescent Trail is a haven for cyclists and joggers, but Maryland purchased the right of way in 1988 with the intent of building a transit line. Light rail would keep some of the trail, and much of the surrounding foliage, intact. -- There's no rule that the federal government can fund only one major transit initiative in a state at any given time. Rather, federal officials will fund projects based on cost-effectiveness per rider. The Purple Line and Baltimore's Red Line both are worthy candidates. It doesn't hurt that former Maryland transportation secretary John D. Porcari, a long-time champion of the Purple Line, is now deputy secretary of transportation for the Obama administration. Instead of being obstructionist, Chevy Chase officials should dedicate the thousands of dollars that would fund a legal challenge to minimizing the impact of light rail on the trail. Meanwhile, Mr. O'Malley ought not to let a vocal minority drown out strong support for light rail. With federal officials soon deciding how to allocate millions of dollars for transportation, Mr. O'Malley should endorse light rail -- and do it soon. |
I can't imagine O'Malley not supporting light rail when every agency has voted in favor of it (and by extremely significant margins).
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
Quote:
|
Quote:
Also: Maryland has politicians who undoubtedly favor one project over the other. Since FTA approval is often based on political pressure just as much as cost-effectiveness, a bunch of politicians supporting the Purple Line at the expense of Baltimore's Red Line will play a serious role in whether the Baltimore project gets Federal approval. Finally, there are social-justice issues to contend with. The Purple Line, in its initial segment, will run almost exclusively through wealthy and middle-class areas of Montgomery and western PG, areas where residents presumably have a greater amount of choice as to housing location (relative to workplaces) and greater access to autos. Baltimore's Red Line, while it serves mostly yuppies in Canton on the east end, serves many underprivileged, poor neighborhoods to the west. Since an explicit goal of transit policy is to provide mobility to those who cannot afford widespread auto ownership, and possibly cannot afford to move to areas within walking or transit distance of their workplaces, the government has an imperative to fund transit improvements to poor areas. This is not done as a form of welfare but as an improvement to these neighborhoods that allows access to jobs, to encourage the poor to support themselves. ---------------- I'm not against the Purple Line. It's a great idea, especially for DC's planning system of dense, Metro-oriented town centers. Circumferential rail lines probably wouldn't succeed in any other American city. Even in NYC, America's transit capital, the G remains the lowest-utilized of all subway lines because it only connects outer boroughs. But to represent the Purple Line as a slam dunk, and as the first transportation priority of the entire state of Maryland, is just wrong. |
Doesn't the purple line have higher ridership projections than the red line? They're both pretty high, but I thought I remembered reading the purple line was higher? And it's not remotely fair to basically punish the people in the northern DC suburbs who support the purple line just because they're more wealthy than the area proposed for the red line expansion.
|
Quote:
1) Do you include light rail and BRT? A generation from now, central DC (and Arlington and Alexandria) will be supplemented by an expansive streetcar and BRT system that will provide substantial relief to the Metro. 2) Metro is looking at building underground pedestrian connections (and allowing free transfers) between some of the close together downtown stations. The best opportunities for this are at the two Farragut stations and between Metro Center and Gallery Place. 3) Metro is in the process of lengthening all trains from 6 cars to 8. 5) Metro just announced a $177 million rehab/upgrade project for the Red line. It's mostly track work and whatnot, but it dispels the myth that big money only goes to the suburbs. 6) A few years ago DC opened a new infill Metro station at New York Avenue. Alexandria is considering one at Potomac Yards. 7) 2nd entrances with new mezzanines are being planned at some stations, such as Rosslyn, Ballston and East Falls Church. Now all that having been said, you're right that it's really easy for suburban jurisdictions to talk about Metro extensions, and harder to expand in the core, but there is plenty of talk and money going to core issues. Quote:
|
A Fast Track to a Busway (Washington Post)
A Fast Track to a Busway
Agency May Seek U.S. Funds for Network of Special Lanes By Ashley Halsey III Washington Post Staff Writer Wednesday, July 15, 2009 http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...403542_pf.html Picture yourself whizzing from Dumfries to Tysons Corner in rush-hour traffic. Imagine every traffic light turning green as you zip swiftly from the heart of the District during the commute home. Those fantasies wouldn't be so far-fetched under a proposal up for consideration today that would rely on federal stimulus money to create a network of rapid service bus lanes throughout the metropolitan region within two years. In a bid to grab some of the $1.5 billion available as part of the stimulus outlay for transportation, the Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments has packaged a number of existing and revised plans to propose a bus rapid transit system that would rival Metrorail in its scope. The proposal recognizes that there is neither the time nor the money to build enough high-speed rail service to alleviate the crush of traffic in the nation's second-most-congested region. If bus service becomes less expensive and significantly faster, the theory goes, commuters will abandon their cars and ride to work instead. "You can fight the traffic and then pay $13 to park when you get there, or you can walk to the bus and get there faster," said Ronald F. Kirby, COG's director of transportation, who pointed out that many federal and private-sector employees receive subsidized transit passes. "You're essentially going to get congestion-free travel for free." The proposal, for which COG hopes to receive $300 million in stimulus money, would link existing HOV lanes and highways where exclusive toll lanes are being built with feeder streets in suburban neighborhoods and the city. Those streets would have dedicated bus lanes, enabling buses to bypass intersection congestion, or electronic devices that would regulate traffic signals to favor approaching buses. At the heart of the system would be a radically restructured K Street between Ninth and 23rd streets NW, an east-west D.C. thoroughfare already thick with bus traffic. Long-standing plans to create a pair of bus-only lanes would be expanded under the proposal, increasing the number to three, including an alternating passing lane. Parking would be eliminated, and two lanes in each direction would be devoted to regular traffic. With the ability to pass one another on K Street, the buses could leapfrog when necessary to avoid delay, merging onto dedicated bus lanes that could carry them across the Roosevelt and the 14th Street bridges to new exclusive lanes on interstates 66 and 395 in Virginia. New high-occupancy toll (HOT) lanes would carry them along Shirley Highway to Dale City. Twelve other roadways that currently carry 80,000 bus riders a day in the District, Virginia and Maryland would be modified with special lanes and priority signal controls to speed bus passage. The proposal also seeks federal funding to provide 1,600 bicycles to be made available for public use at 160 bike stations in the District, Alexandria, Arlington County, Silver Spring and Bethesda. Kirby said the proposal is not intended to increase the number of buses on the road but to increase the number of riders on each bus. "There's a lot of bus service out there now that's stuck in traffic," he said. "It's more about managing the roadway in many places so that people will get there faster, rather than adding buses." The overall price tag for the project, including construction of some bus stops that would resemble mini-train stations and other improvements, is put at almost $820 million. The proposal, to be considered today by COG's Transportation Planning Board, would seek $300 million in stimulus funding. That's the maximum amount available to any jurisdiction competing for part of the $1.5 billion. To receive the money, projects have to be ready for immediate groundbreaking and are supposed to be completed within two years. "If we got this grant, these facilities have to be on the ground in two years -- by 2012," Kirby said. "Physically, it can be done. The K Street busway is a big construction job. The other pieces are incremental and very doable." To meet the two-year deadline, work would have to begin in the spring and summer of next year, Kirby said. |
Va. Wants Federal Funds for High-Speed Rail (Washington Post)
Va. Wants Federal Funds for High-Speed Rail
By Jennifer Buske Washington Post Sunday, August 2, 2009 http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...101959_pf.html Virginia officials will ask the federal government for more than $1.6 billion in stimulus money to implement high-speed rail between Petersburg and the District. The state wants to claim part of the $8 billion available through the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act's rail stimulus program. The funding will be used to make infrastructure improvements needed for trains to travel up to 90 mph along the Interstate 95 corridor -- a speed that could cut the travel time almost in half, said Jennifer Pickett, spokeswoman for the Virginia Department of Rail and Public Transportation. The current maximum speed is 79 mph, she said, but trains rarely reach that along the stretch, which is traveled by more than 716,000 people annually. The state will apply for the funding in stages, with the first application for $72 million due Aug. 24, said Barbara Reese, deputy director of policy for Gov. Timothy M. Kaine (D). If approved, the money will go toward "shovel-ready" improvements on a stretch between Fredericksburg and Prince William County. The next application -- for $1.57 billion to finish I-95 corridor improvements -- will go out in the fall. Projects will include updating signals and grade separations and adding new track, a move that will benefit freight shipments, too, Reese said. "High-speed rail has been a priority of ours," said Sharon Bulova (D), chairman of the Fairfax County Board of Supervisors and vice chairman of the Virginia Rail Advisory Board. "I think the more we can shift motorists from their single-passenger automobiles to passenger rail, the better." Pickett said the state is in a good position to get stimulus money because it already has a dedicated source of rail capital funding, has invested more than $197 million in the Richmond-to-Washington rail system and has received the go-ahead from Amtrak to pursue high-speed rail. Virginia is also an important link to the Northeast, one of the nation's busiest transportation corridors, he said. Virginia Railway Express officials said high-speed rail would also benefit Virginia commuters traveling along the Fredericksburg line to Union Station. Once high-speed is in place, the commuter rail service could add an express train with limited stops and shave time off the current commuter schedule, which has trains operating between 60 and 70 mph, VRE spokesman Mark Roeber said. "It would draw a whole new clientele," Roeber said. "Now, for the most part, trains beat cars heading into D.C., but not always. If we were running an express, no car could beat that train, and the demand for that service would be very high." VRE's average daily ridership reached 15,700 in July. If an express train is added, Roeber said, it could attract an additional 1,000 riders daily. Pickett said high-speed trains, operated by Amtrak, could be implemented as early as 2011 along the Fredericksburg to Prince William stretch and by 2017 along the rest of the I-95 corridor. The plan to add high-speed trains is the second major rail transportation effort in Virginia this year. This fall, the state will begin running intercity trains from Lynchburg and Richmond to Washington. This expansion in passenger rail service is expected to remove 1.4 million cars from the highways and save more than 8.3 million gallons of fuel each year, officials said. |
My question is - what are they going to do about Ashland? It needs to be bypassed. I wonder if that is included in the $1.57 billion. Also there are plenty of slow curves on the old RF&P. So far all I have ever heard about is 90mph top speeds between Richmond and Washington which is not that much of an improvement.
Amtrak was previously talking about electrifying Washington-Richmond so I wonder whether that figures in as well. |
O'Malley Endorses Light Rail for Purple Line (Washington Post)
O'Malley Endorses Light Rail for Purple Line
By Lisa Rein and James Hohmann Washington Post Staff Writers Tuesday, August 4, 2009 9:06 AM http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...l?hpid=topnews Gov. Martin O'Malley endorsed a light rail line over bus rapid transit Tuesday by announcing that Maryland will pursue federal transit money to build a Purple Line linking Prince George's and Montgomery counties. "What we're presenting today is rightfully called the locally preferred alternative," O'Malley said, during a news conference at the New Carrollton Metro Station, the proposed eastern terminus for the Purple Line. He said his administration will apply for funding for the 16-mile line as well as a 14-mile Red Line through Baltimore, two long-awaited projects that have been in the planning stages for years. O'Malley scheduled a whistle-stop train tour befitting both announcements: After the 8:30 press conference at New Carrollton, he plans to board a Baltimore-bound MARC train at 9:30 and travel to the West Baltimore station. When that train arrives at 10:14 a.m, he'll make his Red Line announcement. Political support for both projects is behind light rail, although they face local opposition because they would run along local streets and not underground. The Purple Line would run along a popular wooded trail in Chevy Chase and through the golf course of a country club in Columbia. Both lines are expected to get a boost from the No. 2 official at the U.S. Department of Transportation, John D. Porcari. who championed both when he was O'Malley's transportation secretary. Competition for federal money still will be tough, though. |
Rail Station at Heart of Plan To Remake New Carrollton (Washington Post)
Rail Station at Heart of Plan To Remake New Carrollton
By Greg Gaudio Washington Post Staff Writer Friday, August 14, 2009 http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...302595_pf.html The train station is the nucleus. Around it, high-rise buildings with a mix of apartments, offices and shops form a bustling urban center. People use public transportation more and their cars less. They stroll on wide sidewalks past storefronts, greenery and public art. This is the vision for the area around New Carrollton Station, circa 2030, outlined in a new transit district development plan and zoning overlay that received preliminary approval July 30 from the Prince George's County Planning Board. The plan, which proposes zoning changes and new standards for developers, is intended to transform the area into a walkable community. At present, the area is a combination of expansive parking lots, monolithic office buildings, single-family homes and garden apartments. The main retail offerings are in shopping centers along Annapolis Road, a six-lane highway. "The season for mega-malls and sprawl development, it's basically over," said William Washburn, the Maryland-National Capital Park and Planning Commission coordinator who is managing the New Carrollton project. "The Washington metro area, like the rest of the nation, is facing real challenges in terms of fiscal ability to maintain services. . . . Sprawl development is becoming harder and harder to service." The plan envisions five distinct "neighborhoods" in the 640-acre site, with as many as 5,500 housing units and as much as 6.1 million square feet of office and retail space. A renovated train station would anchor the urban Metro Core neighborhood, where mixed-use high-rises would sprout around the existing Internal Revenue Service and Computer Sciences Corp. buildings. The surrounding neighborhoods would consist of smaller mixed-use structures and existing homes. Extensive redevelopment is also planned for neighborhoods designated in the plan as the Annapolis Road Corridor and Garden City. In the existing North Hillside residential neighborhood, the plan shows infill development replacing some buildings in the 187-unit Carrollon Manor apartment complex. The nearby Carrollan Gardens Condominiums would remain intact. About 330 single-family homes in the West Lanham Hills-Hanson Oaks area, secluded neighborhoods at the western edge of the site, would also be left untouched. "We think that this is in keeping with the trend that more and more jurisdictions are doing anyway," Washburn said. "Everybody in the region is looking at Arlington County," where development has flourished around Metro stops. The five members of the county Planning Board voted unanimously to grant preliminary approval to the plan, a sign that they are likely to adopt it when they return from recess Sept. 10. It would then be submitted to the Prince George's County Council, which sits as the District Council on planning and zoning matters. Washburn said he expects the council to vote on the plan in March. After that, the Park and Planning Commission would incorporate the Planning Board's recommendations and the council's amendments into a final version of the plan. The area around New Carrollton Station has long been considered an ideal candidate for redevelopment because it serves as a commuter hub and a gateway to Washington for travelers coming from the north and east. The station is the eastern terminus of Metro's Orange Line and a stop for MARC and Amtrak trains and a variety of bus lines. In the region, only Union Station offers more transportation options, Washburn said. Maryland also proposes to make the station the eastern terminus for a light-rail Purple Line between Prince George's and Montgomery counties. Plans to redevelop the area were in place as early as the 1980s but failed to materialize. Al Dobbins, deputy planning director for the Park and Planning Commission, attributed the delay mostly to the county's historically soft commercial real estate market. "The county as a whole just hasn't been successful in attracting transit-oriented or mixed-use development," he said. Developers might also have been deterred by the area's uneven topography, Dobbins said. The recession helped stall several projects that were on the table. One was a $350 million venture between Metro and Federal Development, a company that specializes in developing public property, that would have placed mixed-use high-rises on Metro land between the station and the IRS building. "Basically, it timed out," said Nat Bottigheimer, Metro's assistant general manger of planning and joint development. "Neither one of us exercised the option to continue it." Another was Metroview, 10 mixed-use 20-story buildings planned by the Carl Williams Group and UrbanAmerica, owners of the Computer Sciences building. "It's been on hold since the real estate crash a year and a half ago," said John Lally, an attorney for Carl Williams. Lally said Carl Williams is positioning itself to build when the economy rebounds. If the New Carrollton plan is approved, "the council makes it clear that developers don't have to walk around in the dark," Lally said. "They say: 'Here are your guidelines, aim for this, keep the bar high, and you're likely to get our approval.' " People who live near the station are optimistic about redevelopment, but they are also skeptical, said Kate Tsubata, a member of the West Lanham Hills Citizens' Association. "Everything that was promised to us in the past never materialized," she said. "In the early '90s, we were told that the [transit-oriented development] zone would create mixed-use development that would bring in new businesses, people interested in buying houses and creating jobs. And none of that happened. We got the IRS, which is basically a little island fortress." Tsubata said she hopes that the final version of the plan focuses more on residents, allowing them to "be the contractors on jobs [or] have the first crack at the contracts for renting a store." |
Road Closures Transform Tysons (Vienna Connection)
Road Closures Transform Tysons
Three more long-term closures put in place, with more to come. By Mike DiCicco Wednesday, August 19, 2009 Vienna Connection http://www.connectionnewspapers.com/...per=73&cat=104 Temporary closures of lanes, shoulders and turn lanes have become commonplace in Tysons Corner, the most heavily traveled area of the county, in the year or so since construction work began on Rail to Dulles and High-Occupancy Toll (HOT) lanes on the Capital Beltway. But three more closures just went into effect that will not reopen for the morning rush or at the end of the week. One, in fact, is permanent. http://www.connectionnewspapers.com/....asp?id=212065 However, McLean Citizens Association President Rob Jackson said there wasn’t a lot of concern about these three closures among McLean residents. "I haven’t heard a lot of specific complaints," he said, although he noted that, "if we had our way, we wouldn’t be going through this." He said he wanted to commend the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) and Fluor Corporation — the company building the HOT lanes — for a "180-degree turnaround" in communication efforts since last year’s outcry from residents who learned of a staging area being cleared near Cooper Middle School only after they saw trees being cut down. "They’re really doing a good job of reaching out and communicating ahead of time and letting everyone know what’s going on," Jackson said. THE CLOSURE NEAREST MCLEAN, which went into effect on Sunday and will last 45 days, is on the ramp from the Beltway southbound to northbound Route 123. The detour route requires drivers to take a short trip along the Dulles Toll Road to hit Dolley Madison Boulevard. The route is actually shorter, and VDOT spokesman Steve Titunik said traffic on what is now the detour route was always heavier than on the ramp that is now closed. And the jaunt on the Toll Road does not cost anything. However, Titunik said, "The construction part of this is not fun." The latest ramp closure is to allow for preparation for the construction of ramps connecting Westpark Drive to the HOT lanes, and also for the creation of two water retention facilities. Another connection to the HOT lanes will be built nearby, from Jones Branch Road. Titunik said the new connections would encourage the many commuters who work in that area, where there are a number of large employers such as Hilton, Gannett and Freddie Mac, to carpool. "The point is, it’s providing choices for getting in and around Tysons Corner," he said. Any drivers who miss the detour onto the Toll Road, though, will have to take the Route 7 exit and would likely use Magarity Road to get into McLean. Jackson said the citizens association is already concerned about "bailout traffic" on its roads, caused by drivers trying to avoid construction delays now, rising tolls on the Toll Road in the near future and, eventually, backups due to a more densely developed Tysons Corner. He said the MCA was unconvinced that rail and the HOT lanes would keep most commuters from driving by themselves, although he was pleased that the toll lanes would allow Beltway bus service. Just west of the Beltway ramp closure, the barricade that recently closed off the median break on Route 7 in front of Marshalls Department Store, north of Route 123, will one day be replaced by a Metro station. Previously, drivers coming out of the Marshalls parking lot could turn left onto Route 7 north or cross the road to an unnamed service road known by the state as Frontage Road. This road is the only point of access to a number of businesses, including Clyde’s Restaurant, the Orvis sportsman’s clothing store and a Virginia ABC store among others, and leads to Pinnacle Drive. Drivers coming out of Frontage Road can no longer turn left onto Route 7 south or cross to Marshalls. "That’s being closed because we’re about to start construction of Tysons Central Station there," said Marcia McAllister, communications manager for the Dulles Corridor Metrorail Project. In the early fall, all other mid-block turns along Route 7 in Tysons Corner will be closed as well, as the median is widened to make way for the rail that will run down its center. ROUTE 7 will be pushed out to fill the areas now occupied by service roads, and McAllister said the service roads also would begin to be permanently shut down in the fall. Just south of Marshalls, the left turn from the ramp coming from Route 123 south onto eastbound Route 7 has also been closed, due to tunnel construction. "You can still go down that ramp and go westbound on Route 7," said Howard Menaker, an engineer with Dulles Transit Partners. Rail will depart from the Dulles Toll Road at Tysons Corner, heading south on Route 123, tunneling under the intersection with Route 7 and emerging at the station in front of Marshalls, Menaker said. The left turn will reopen in three years. In the meantime, drivers who want to get from Route 123 southbound to eastbound Route 7 have to make a left on International Drive, which hits Route 7 only about a block from the interchange. |
Plans Don't Square With Tysons Vision (Washington Post)
Plans Don't Square With Tysons Vision
Proposed Rules Renew Density Debate By Lisa Rein Washington Post Tuesday, September 15, 2009 http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...091403370.html Fairfax County planners on Wednesday will propose rules for builders in Tysons Corner that retreat from the vision local officials approved last fall, a shift some civic leaders worry will jeopardize the blueprint to remake the area into a walkable urban center. The planning staff's concept of the best way to redevelop the area's sprawling office buildings, strip malls and traffic-choked roads is at odds with the ideas of a county-appointed panel that a year ago recommended allowing developers to construct high-density buildings, where the square footage could be as much as six times the area of the land. In exchange, landowners would be required to contribute land or cash toward a new, walkable street grid, parks, fire stations and other amenities, the panel said. The four major roadways that slice through the area -- routes 7 and 123, the Capital Beltway and the Dulles Toll Road -- would not change. But the task force envisioned eight mini-cities springing up around them with a dense mix of housing, offices and stores within a half mile of four Metrorail stations under construction in Tysons, the tallest buildings located closest to the stops. A new bus or light-rail line would be added to ferry workers and residents within the 1,700-acre area so people would not have to drive. An expected 100,000 jobs would be added to Virginia's largest employment hub, double the number there now, and the number of residents, now 17,000, eventually would grow to more than 100,000, according to the task force's plan. As a 23-mile Metrorail extension to Dulles International Airport neared approval in September 2008, the supervisors quickly signed off on the concept. But planners charged with translating the vision into zoning rules reviewed it and came to a different conclusion: The proposed city is too urban. "We're looking for an urban feel and urban experience," said Jim Zook, the county's planning director. "But there are cities across this country that work very well at lesser densities" than the task force proposed. Zook and his staff have concluded that the density of what the task force envisions could be built when Tysons is fully redeveloped in about 40 years would overwhelm traffic. Planners say that would be about five times the 44 million square feet of offices, malls, condos and townhouses there now. Before developers can build high-rises, even near the Metrorail stations, planners say, the area's already clogged road network will need to expand to accommodate the extra development because many of the new residents and office workers will drive. That would require three new interchanges on the Dulles Toll Road; another lane on the Beltway between Interstate 66 and Route 7, in addition to the high-occupancy toll lanes now under construction; and wider lanes on other local roads. So planners have devised rules that reduce by as much as one-third the building recommended by the task force. Before development could proceed, specific road improvements and other amenities would need to be in place. While boosters of more dense development say a shuttle bus system is a crucial element of the redevelopment that must be running when the Metro stations open, the staff says the idea requires more study before it is included in the zoning plan. "It comes down to a difference over timing," said Walter L. Alcorn, the planning commission chairman who is leading efforts to reconcile the conflicting visions. "The staff's perspective is that we have to look at the constraints of the transportation infrastructure and how much it can take. Based on that, the densities that were recommended by the task force were too high." The building rules for the redevelopment of Tysons are far from written. The draft could change before the planning commission holds public hearings and recommends a final version to the supervisors, probably by late spring. But frustrated landowners, business leaders and others who worked over four years to create a pedestrian-oriented plan for Tysons criticize the planners' vision as shortsighted. "It's business as usual: Suburban development standards we're trying to get away from," said Clark Tyler, a transportation and economic development consultant for Science Applications International who is chairman of the 37-member study panel. "You're going to have more development that's contingent on the automobile, which is insanity." Tyler and others supporting denser development say it would take decades for property owners to build as high and as big as they would be allowed to; they say the market will help set the pace of construction. "No area gets fully built out to its full potential," said J. Douglas Koelemay, a task force member and the vice president of community relations for SAIC, whose complex on Route 7 is next to one of the Metrorail stations. Property owners who stand to benefit from the development possibilities say they are happy to donate land for a new grid of streets and other amenities. But to generate the revenue to make it financially practical to tear down car dealerships and other low-rise buildings on their land, they say they need to be able to build more. "Unless there's enough economic value in what we're redeveloping, they don't come down," said Aaron Georgelas, managing partner of the Georgelas Group, which plans to build a mixed-use development on about 30 acres it owns next to one of the Metrorail stations. Tyler and others on the task force are lobbying the supervisors to push for more generous building rules. But the political perils are clear: Many residents of neighboring McLean and Vienna remain cautious about creating a large urban center at Tysons. "We're not like downtown D.C., where you walk three blocks and there's another Metro station," said Rob Jackson, president of the McLean Citizens Association. Board of Supervisors Chairman Sharon Bulova (D) said there might be a middle ground: building rules that could be changed midway through the redevelopment if there is too much congestion. "We need sufficient density in Tysons to make the vision happen," she said. "We also need to provide flexibility in the plan to accommodate future unknowns." |
Quote:
|
Tea Party Protesters Protest D.C. Metro Service
Tea Party Protesters Protest D.C. Metro Service
Wall Street Journal 9/16/09 http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2009/0...metro-service/ Protesters who attended Saturday’s Tea Party rally in Washington found a new reason to be upset: Apparently they are unhappy with the level of service provided by the subway system. Rep. Kevin Brady called for a government investigation into whether the government-run subway system adequately prepared for this weekend’s rally to protest government spending and government services. Seriously. The Texas Republican on Wednesday released a letter he sent to Washington’s Metro system complaining that the taxpayer-funded subway system was unable to properly transport protesters to the rally to protest government spending and expansion. “These individuals came all the way from Southeast Texas to protest the excessive spending and growing government intrusion by the 111th Congress and the new Obama administration,” Brady wrote. “These participants, whose tax dollars were used to create and maintain this public transit system, were frustrated and disappointed that our nation’s capital did not make a great effort to simply provide a basic level of transit for them.” A spokesman for Brady says that “there weren’t enough cars and there weren’t enough trains.” Brady tweeted as much from the Saturday march. “METRO did not prepare for Tea Party March! More stories. People couldn’t get on, missed start of march. I will demand answers from Metro,” he wrote on Twitter. Brady says in his letter to Metro that overcrowding forced an 80-year-old woman and elderly veterans in wheelchairs to pay for cabs. He concludes that it “appears that Metro added no additional capacity to its regular weekend schedule.” |
Anacostia Streetcar Track Installation Begins (Washington Post)
Anacostia Streetcar Track Installation Begins
By James Hohmann Washington Post Sunday, September 20, 2009 http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...091902291.html Crews are finally laying the tracks for the Anacostia streetcar line in Southeast Washington, causing delays through the end of the year on South Capitol Street but exciting boosters of the $55 million project. Track installation on Firth Sterling Avenue has begun, but the more visible installation of tracks at the South Capitol Street intersection is expected to start next week, the District's Department of Transportation said. Through the end of this month, the track work will reduce traffic flow at the intersection to one lane in each direction, causing delays of five to 10 minutes. Other work will continue in that area through the end of the year. The locations of several proposed stops along Howard Road and Martin Luther King Jr. Avenue SE are not set in stone. But officials overseeing the project hail the work as a significant step toward the first segment of what they hope will become a citywide system a decade from now. "The tracks are actually going in," said Gabe Klein, the District's director of transportation. "As people see that, they'll realize we're getting closer than we've ever been." The District had hoped to have streetcars running through Anacostia by the end of this year, but the project was beset by delays. The city purchased three red-and-gray trolleys almost three years ago for $10 million. Those sit in a warehouse in the Czech Republic, where they were manufactured. Streetcars, a form of light rail powered by overhead wires, share lanes with automobiles. Similar projects in Seattle and Portland are considered successes. The initial 1 1/2 -mile segment includes a platform near the Navy Annex at South Capitol Street and Firth Sterling Avenue. Another platform is by Barry Farms on Firth Sterling Avenue. A maintenance facility is being built near the end of the line on South Capitol Street to service and store the trolleys. Klein said the District might have some part of the Anacostia line running before fall 2012. Late last month, the District closed two intersections to cross-traffic along H Street NE to install tracks for a separate streetcar line. Klein said his department decided to lay that track because other work was going on in the area. Engineers still need to find a way to power the cars on H Street and find places for the streetcars to turn around, said transportation spokesman John Lisle. They also need to find a place to store and maintain the cars on that line. The transportation director has a grand vision for streetcar lines across the District that fills in the gaps where Metrorail doesn't run and resurrects an elaborate system that existed a century ago. Klein acknowledges that in the current fiscal climate, with massive shortfalls and short-term demands for money, it's hard to get it moving. "I know we're in a downturn right now, but these are decade-long projects," Klein said. "If we never thought ahead when we were in a downturn, we'd never get anywhere. We're building upon a lot of the work that's already been done." |
Western Alliance for Rail to Dulles gives itself more time to approve tax district
Western Alliance for Rail to Dulles gives itself more time to approve tax district
Washington Business Journal Sarah Krouse September 21, 2009 http://washington.bizjournals.com/wa..._deadline.html The deadline for a petition to tax property owners to fund a portion of the Rail to Dulles has come and gone, leaving the number of stops along the silver line up in the air even longer. The Western Alliance for Rail to Dulles, a nonprofit organization of property owners — including major area players such as Boston Properties, Brandywine Realty Trust, Corporate Office Properties Trust, The JBG Companies, Tishman Speyer and Vornado/Charles E. Smith — is circulating a petition to establish a tax district for property owners along the planned line. Under the plan, property owners would tax themselves to pay for $330 million of Fairfax County’s $420 million Phase II share. This would allow the creation of three stops at Reston Town Center, Herndon at the Toll Road and Monroe Avenue and Route 28. The tax district would last no longer than 50 years from its inception or 40 years from the first tax levy. Rates would gradually increase from 5 cents per $100 of land value in 2010 by 5 cents each year until 2013. In 2013, the rate will plateau at 20 cents and stay in effect until all three proposed stations were operational. WARD said the tax should not exceed 25 cents per $100 of land value. In exchange for the tax, owners are safeguarded from downzoning and from higher transportation taxes on commercial land and will receive greater density for projects within the Dulles Corridor. The group set a Sept. 18 deadline to collect signatures from 51 percent of the commercial, industrial, multi-family and hotel property owners, but has extended it...until they get the signatures. Members are staying mum about the percentage of signatures they have secured because “it is constantly fluctuating.” “We still have some time,” said Jeff Fairfield of Launders Charitable Trust. Fairfield has spearheaded the petition effort with Michael Cooper, senior vice president of Brandywine Realty Trust and Peter Johnson, senior vice president of Boston Properties. If the district is not formed by the year’s end, the group said it will become increasingly difficult for Fairfax County to fund its portion of Phase II. According to WARD, it is unlikely that the stations could be added after the line delivers in 2016. A tax district for Phase I of the rail is already established and operational. |
Economy Slows Establishment of Tax District (Washington Post)
Economy Slows Establishment of Tax District
Move Would Help Fund Metro Extension to Dulles By Derek Kravitz Washington Post Staff Writer Thursday, October 8, 2009 http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...100603897.html A less-than-stellar economic climate is delaying the creation of a special tax district in Fairfax County, officials say, a move needed to pay for the second part of Metro's planned extension to Dulles. The Western Alliance for Rail to Dulles, a nonprofit group made up of Fairfax landowners, is trying to drum up support for the special tax district to help fund the 23-mile extension from a planned Wiehle Avenue station in Reston to Dulles International Airport and Route 772 in Loudoun County. Members of the group had hoped to gather enough signatures by Sept. 18 but fell short, said Lee Fifer, general counsel for the alliance and a lawyer with the McLean firm McGuireWoods. To implement the district, the group needs support from either a majority of the affected landowners or from owners controlling a majority of the land in the area. Fifer declined to disclose the percentage of landowners who have signed on, but he and Fairfax County Supervisor Catherine M. Hudgins (D-Hunter Mill), whose district includes Tysons Corner, said that the figure is close to the required 51 percent majority. "It's very critical that we do this, given the implications for our business community, and I'm continuing to encourage this as an effective marriage between what we need as far as funding and the potential for future development," Hudgins said. "We're nearing the percentage. When you're dealing with a lot of signatures, you really get all sorts of landowners." In a letter to landowners last month, the alliance said that if the district is not formed by the end of the year, funding for the extension would be in "jeopardy, making it very likely that three future rail stations . . . will never be built." The alliance represents about 30 percent of the affected landowners. A handful of other businesses, represented by the nonprofit Dulles Corridor Users Group, have campaigned against the tax district, saying that the Metro extension is not cost-effective and that it would do little to ease gridlock. Fifer said he is optimistic that the signatures will be collected by the end of the year. The alliance encouraged landowners to sign up by Tuesday, arguing that the Metro stations, once completed, would allow for increased density and development. Fifer said a January start date for tax collection would be crucial, in that it would help build up cash reserves to pay down bonds once they were issued. "The sooner we start collecting, the easier it'll be to pay it off," he said. The plan calls for an initial tax rate of 5 cents for each $100 of assessed value for commercial landowners. The tax rate would increase by 5 cents per year, to 20 cents per $100 of assessed value in 2013. Beyond that, the alliance says, the tax rate would remain below 25 cents. The county's debt manager, Len Wales, said the $330 million in capital investments for the taxed landowners could reach more than twice that amount once interest rates are locked in. And Fairfax is expected to pitch in $90 million. At least 51 percent of the commercial property owners in the proposed tax district, representing $8.4 billion in property values, must sign on before it can be approved. The petition also needs approval from the Herndon Town Council and Fairfax's Board of Supervisors. Stewart Schwartz, executive director of the Washington-based Coalition for Smarter Growth, said several landowners had expressed concern about the long walk for commuters from station platforms to nearby mixed-use developments. His group has recommended improvements to pedestrian overpasses at the stations, including air-conditioned walkways and automated "people-movers." Board of Supervisors Chairman Sharon Bulova (D) said that although the economic climate is "not ideal for this project," county officials are feeling "pretty positive about the funding mechanism to get rail to Dulles." |
The Transport Politic has a very interesting and thorough proposal for a new heavy rail line in Northern Virginia, along Route 7 and through Bailey's Crossroads and Columbia Pike.
http://www.thetransportpolitic.com/2...core/#comments |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 5:04 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Prev