As promised, the Growler ambled over to George Washington Middle School yesterday to attend the city’s meeting on dedicated transit at Potomac Yard.
We need not linger too long over the technicalities because, as expected, people were still arguing over whether bus rapid transit (BRT) to Braddock Road Metro should run through a dedicated median in the center of US Route 1, or at the east and/or west curbside like traditional transit.
To the uninitiated this issue seems mostly outside Parker-Gray’s turf. The stretch of US Route 1 now proposed as a median transitway runs from S. Glebe Road at the southern end of the Potomac Yard retail mall to somewhere north of the current Monroe Street Bridge -- about 3,000 feet. BRT then will merge into normal traffic, proceed to Braddock Road Metro via First Street, N. Fayette and Madison Streets.
It is the city’s impassioned proposal to run a second leg of BRT from the Braddock Road Metro station to Ft. Belvoir, presumably using N. Henry Street, that has the Growler’s underdivided attention. The idea was floated in the September 2006 draft of the Braddock Road Metro Small Area Plan and is also included in the draft recommendations of the Ad Hoc Transportation Task Force. The upcoming migration of defense jobs to Ft. Belvoir clealry is driving (pun fully intended) the proposal.
This could be damaging to our neighborhood, which has the only stretch of US Route 1 with single family homes localed directly on the street with minimal buffers provided. Several “how-to” scenarios were provided. One called for removing scarce parking spaces to create a dedicated curbside transit lane. Another scenario envisioned keeping parking but creating a dedicated interior transit lane using the center of Patrick or Henry Streets, a variant of the median scenario. If a center lane median solution is implemented (and that's possible given the Potomac Yard scenarios) trucks could be pushed to the outer lanes, those closest to single family homes.
Oh and let's not forget safety. Just this morning, a truck traveling Patrick Street’s outer lane (a no-no) clipped a motorcycle rider, a tragedy that brought traffic to a standstill. But nobody at last night's forum was willing to answer questions about accident records for our section of Route 1.
Residents on Patrick and Henry Streets have long been troubled by vibrations from heavy vehicles, as well as diesel exhaust fumes pumped into their second story windows. Measures were taken perhaps 12-15 years ago to minimize the environmental health effects but they all appear to be in jeopardy now.
Feeling these concerns, the Growler posed a simple question to J. Lawrence Robinson, Planning Commission member and chairman of the Ad Hoc Transportation Task Force:
When will the City hold a public meeting in Parker-Gray with community residents to listen to their concerns and solicit citizens feedback regarding BRT on the rest of Route 1?
In response, the Growler can assure you that the Cranky One has never seen so much waffling this side of Potomac Yard’s IHOP. Mr. Robinson consistently avoided answering the question, insisting instead that people simply attend the Task Force work session next Tuesday (March 13 at 6:30 pm in the Council Work Room at City Hall). Can people even speak at such a meeting? No. Growler has been to a lot of these sessions and while not closed to the public they don't elicit citizen input.
Better yet, stuttered Mr. Robinson, residents could attend the Planning Commission and City Council meetings that will follow to rubber stamp the ad hoc transportation group's recommendations. He also suggested the Growler and others attend the next Braddock Road meeting on March 20.
Like we plan to miss it! Right-o, we can deal with transportation along the Braddock Plan’s other critical shortcoming before it is slam-dunked by Council in April.
Poul Hertel, a Transporation task force member, sputtered that the task force was still in the early early stages (of what?), but offered not even the vaguest timetable (next month? the fall? next year?) for a Parker-Gray meeting.
Alternatively ICCA President Patricia Schubert piped up, claiming she's arranged “everything” with T&ES officials. The Growler was having none of Ms. Schubert’s nonsense. With only seven members and four ICCA officers present at the last civic association meeting, Ms. Schubert would do better to communicate with a couple of tin cans and waxed string. The fact that she sat through this meeting with development attorney Bud Hart at her elbow hardly gave the appearance of an arms-length anything.
The ending to the BRT saga will not be sweet. The Growler happened to notice this morning that P&Z now has posted the final transportation chapter of the draft Braddock Road Small Area Plan. To add injury to indignity, (we’re past insults) the City is proposing a special tax district for properties located within the Braddock Plan to help defray the cost of BRT. Read page 19.
There's only one appropriate response, folks: it's time to let Mr. Robinson and his colleagues on Planning Commission as well as City Council know that we expect a meeting and aren't going to be ignored. There are links on the Growler's site to E-mail these characters. Use them.
So here's to you Mr. Robinson!
Grrrrrrrrrrrrrrr!!!
24 comments:
Thanks for the heads up Growler, I just sent my email message asking for both a meeting with the ICCA and a broader meeting with the neighborhood on these issues prior to when the Council approves a final plan—this is one I don’t want an update on after the fact! I am really offended by the "come to the planning meetings” response. I agree with you Growler, sitting in the audience with no vote is REALLY useful and effective. Can't remember whether it was the last council meeting or the one before that but I remember Charlotte Landis’ valiant but likely Quixote-like effort to get the Council's attention on this one. I can only imagine that it sucks to be her and her neighbors on Patrick and Henry Streets today!
Send those emails people! Also another plea to match the Growler's for the neighborhood to turn out en-masse at the Braddock Road Plan meeting next week. I don't care if we all agree but we should have one heck of a debate before the neighborhood is turned over to the whims & wishes of people who don’t live here yet!
Is Poul Hertel a hypocrit? The truck involved in this morning's accident was carrying ash from the Mirant Plant. How can he care about some pollution problems but not others?
I remember tackling Route 1 transportation issues years ago. Sarah Becker was ICCA president and she did a heck of a job. The American Trucking Association was furious with us especially the jake brake ordinance. But we stood our ground and that's why the signs are there today.
Rich Baier is badly informed including how it is we did what we did. The only problem we couldn't solve was the removal of haz mat materials from the Route 1 roadways. Sounds like Hertel could care less.
Is the city lying now? Probably. To deal fairly with Route 1 would upset other neighborhoods so Robinson and the politicians trash us instead. It's the way it's always been.
"To the uninitiated this issue seems mostly outside Parker-Gray’s turf."
Yep, Potomac Yard originally proposed two metro stations. Four Mile Run and Potomac Central. Neither was built and now we are being asked to pay literally for the city's mismanagement of the Yard. What intrigues me is the tax proposal! The city imposes BRT then it proposes to tax us in order to pay for it. And nobody's ever asked me if I want. It's planning voodoo if you ask me.
"I remember Charlotte Landis’ valiant but likely Quixote-like effort to get the Council's attention on this one."
If your reference to Quixote-like is your idea of support, then Route 1 residents are really in trouble. It takes guts to hassle the establishment.
"To add injury to indignity, (we’re past insults) the City is proposing a special tax district for properties located within the Braddock Plan to help defray the cost of BRT."
This hardly reads like the beginning of a BRT discussion. A tax revolt anyone? It sure feels like taxation without representation.
Point taken, should have clarified.At the time she was running at windmills, but with more neighborhood collective action I hope We are successful.I
"This could be damaging to our neighborhood, which has the only stretch of US Route 1 with single family homes localed directly on the street with minimal buffers provided."
Has anyone noticed that US Route 1 is only four lanes when passing through Del Ray? So what makes you think Commission Chairman Eric Wagner will give Route 1 residents a fair shake? But tax us?
"Can't remember whether it was the last council meeting or the one before that but I remember Charlotte Landis’ valiant but likely Quixote-like effort to get the Council's attention on this one."
We saw her Council presentation on television and she did an excellent job. If you don't dream it, you can achieve it. So what's your agenda?
"If your reference to Quixote-like is your idea of support, then Route 1 residents are really in trouble. It takes guts to hassle the establishment."
Point taken. I meant to say Quixote-like in reference to her willingness to bring the issue to the Council who seem often tone-deaf to the concerns of Parker Gray. That said, I have nothing but respect for her efforts and that of her neighbors for continually bringing up the issue of what they have already lost to previous widenings and "progress" for pass-through commuters. My point was that we need more people saying the same thing in order to get the City's attention.
I haven't seen coverage of the truck crash in any papers. Where are you getting the information?
"At the time she was running at windmills,"
How arrogant are you? If that's your idea of an apology for hard work well done then stay home.
I'm torn. The Braddock Plan is like gang rape. Outsiders telling us how our neighborhood should be designed. I ask you, Growler. How many other area plans are written with guiding principles that include the protection of other neighborhoods like Del Ray, Rosemont and Northeast?
"So what makes you think Commission Chairman Eric Wagner will give Route 1 residents a fair shake? But tax us?"
The reference to a special tax district seems poorly defined. But I agree that its inclusion suggests the transportation discussions are already well underway. The BID proposal failed so maybe this will too.
"Where are you getting the information?"
An officer on the scene. A neighbor took pictures.
"So what's your agenda?
I am guessing from the list of players that there is more to this saga than has so far been explained. Wanna bet Route 1 residents are the last to know the city's plans?
"I just sent my email message asking for both a meeting with the ICCA and a broader meeting with the neighborhood on these issues"
It is unfortunate given meager ICCA attendance that anyone would suggest an issue of this magnitude be brought to the ICCA for discussion. BRT is a life changing notion especially for those who live in the US Route 1 corridor.
The city is obligated to discuss the program, its ramifications and proposed stops, with the neighbors most immediately effected. A city-sponsored meeting should be held prior to the passage of the Braddock Plan invitations extended to all who live within the boundaries of the proposed new tax district. Until then any language relating to BRT should be stricken from the Braddock Road Small Area Plan.
It is amazing that a city that has failed to keep or grow jobs is now willing to compromise our residential quality of life on behalf of passers by. BRT as thus far explained is a perverted notion. Much like Mr. Pupo's ranting letter to the editor this week. His letters fascinate as the tax records suggest Mr. Pupo has lived in the neighborhood only since 2004.
In 1992 when Braddock Road's Small Area Plan was first being developed Del Ray reduced Mount Vernon Avenue's FAR from 3.0 to .75. Look at the Del Ray streetscape that has resulted since the reduction. It is one thing to argue the elimination of public housing clearly it should be dispersed but it is quite another to replace it with dense construction and BRT.
We suffer from the absence of neighborhood vision so we are content to let others impose theirs on us. It is not obvious how BRT facilitates local travel and the burden is on the city to tell us. Mr. Hertel need not attend the meeting.
"I just sent my email message asking for both a meeting with the ICCA and a broader meeting with the neighborhood"
I can tell you that if the ICCA hosts such a meeting we will not attend instead opting for the latter. Dysfunctional best sums the group as two of its Board members we've discovered live on Patrick Street. Since the city claims to be in communication with the President but Board members are ignorant of the particulars thanks but no thanks. The real indignity, Growler, is that we have been asked to endure the dyfunctional relationship between Planning and Transportation staffs. All can deny it but it's true. Now at the Plan's 11th hour verbiage creeps into the transporation chapter only a few can explain. We have yet to meet those knowledgeable few let alone hear how our life improves once this "valuable" service is made available.
"At the time she was running at windmills,"
Whoever you are stay home. We who live on Henry and Patrick Streets need help but not your flaky kind.
"'I just sent my email message asking for both a meeting with the ICCA and a broader meeting with the neighborhood'
I can tell you that if the ICCA hosts such a meeting we will not attend instead opting for the latter."
Agreed! We need a meeting with residents in the affected neighborhoods, and we need NOTICE to the affected residents.
I think the neighborhood should take every opportunity to make our concerns about BRT, the Braddock Road plan and public housing density know to the city, including ICCA meetings (they could be more effective if the members demanded more), community meetings, letters to the council and the Braddock road meeting. I think we should pursue every avenue.
I'm a little confused by the comments regarding Eric Pupo's letter to the Gazette, having been described by one poster as "ranting" and by the Growler as a "screed".
While he may have been a bit less succinct than one would hope, was he wrong? His arguments tracked the same ones that are made on this blog week after week; namely, that the huge concentration of public housing in this neighborhood is the paramount problem that has to be solved, and that our elected officials couldn't care less.
Is Andrew MacDonald not worthy of a "screed" directed his way? Shouldn't the mayor have in inbox clogged with "rantings" every week?
Eric Pupo isn't the problem here. Neither is the fact that not everyone who's concerned with the problems of the neighborhood has lived here since 1974, nor the fact that we all don't agree as to issues of building density, parking, open space, etc. The problem is that the people who want to see change in Parker-Gray are as busy fighting with each other as they are fighting the miscreants who run this city.
Posters on this blog always seem baffled by the fact that Del Ray seems to get whatever it wants. Perhaps the fact that there is a Del Ray Citizens Association--and not a ragtag group of competing civic associations and homeowners associations as we have in Parker-Gray--has something to do with it?
The divide-and-conquer strategy has been employed by politicians who don't want to have their constituents stand in the way of their plans for years in Northern Virginia (witness the argument between Reston and McLean over the Tysons Metro extension, for a recent example). Shame on us for letting our politicians get away with it.
"and not a ragtag group of competing civic associations and homeowners associations as we have in Parker-Gray--has something to do with it?"
Amen!!!
"I can tell you that if the ICCA hosts such a meeting we will not attend instead opting for the latter."
This statment just sums up everthing. Divide and conquer at its best.
"I can tell you that if the ICCA hosts such a meeting we will not attend instead opting for the latter.
This statment just sums up everthing. Divide and conquer at its best."
We know the ICCA is struggling as its credibility has diminished greatly over time. People here are looking for a forum where their views will heard, not manipulated and ignored. The want is for fairness.
Thought I would take a peek up near the Lofties to see if what Mr. Pupo ranted about is really the case. Suffice it to say, it was quite the eye-opener. I drove around for the most part (primarily because that doesn't look like the safest part of town to get out and walk around) but all the issues; trash, loitering, unsupervised children in the streets, someone smoking a blunt in plain view, and plenty of noise. It had the feel of near anarchy. And this was just walking Wythe for a bit from the Braddock station and driving around Madison and Montgomery.
I can't see how the Mayor thinks building some tall buildings around Adkins or building more market rate units at Bland is going to fix what I saw. If anything, it might make it worse since the new residents would experience the same problems. And simply put, I could understand the Adkins walkability issue that Mr. Pupo brought up. Standing on Wythe, almost 3/4 of the people walking up from the station walked on the opposite side of the street from Adkins, and when I drove by Madison, no one was even daring to try (it didnt help there was just a mass of people right on the sidewalk at the corner of Fayette and Madison) And this was just at about 7:30; cant imagine how much worse it might get at night.
He's right...it might help some of the Council members to actually hold some meetings or take some tours at night up there while they look at their "plan"
And I am talking about all the issues....density, traffic, BRT, public housing, retail, etc.... its clear P&Z and Council is not looking at the affected area prior to implementing their plan.
Post a Comment