INTERSECT
Newsletter of the Washington Regional Network For Livable
Communities
Volume 8 Number 2
April 21, 2004
Support Intersect, join WRN!
Summary:
* May 18: Dan Burden on Real Streets: New Approaches
to Transportation
* Affordable Housing Progress Report by WRN
Shows Need and Solutions
* Way Beyond Zoning: Form-Based Coding Shapes
Good Places
* A Time to Choose Metro or Outer Beltways
* Dulles Rail: Halfway There but Miles to Go
* Walkable Community Workshops Come to the
Washington Region
* Events & Thank You's
**************************************************************************************************
Real Streets:
New Approaches to Transportation with
Dan Burden, national
authority on pedestrian and bicycle facilities and programs
May 18, 2004
6 pm, refreshments; 6:30 pm, program
National Capital Planning Commission (NCPC)
401 9th St., NW, North Lobby, Suite 500
New thinking among transportation planners is
creating street designs and traffic management approaches that foster
attractive places for pedestrians, bicyclists and cars. Learn from one
of the country's leading voices on better designs for walking and bicycling.
For more about Dan Burden, see: http://www.walkable.org/
RSVP: WRN, 202-667-5445 or e-mail staff@washingtonregion.net.
This event is free. Please arrive before 7 pm & bring photo ID.
Gallery Place, Metro Center, Archives, Federal Triangle Metro stations.
This is the third in WRN's series "Design Matters," see: www.washingtonregion.net
for more information.
******************************************************************************
Affordable
Housing Progress Report by WRN Shows Needs and Solutions
A new report released last week by WRN, "The
Affordable Housing Progress Report: What the Washington, D.C. Region's
Jurisdictions Can Do to Combat the Crisis," shows that the
region's governments are falling behind affordable housing needs and
could meet much more of the need by strengthening existing policies
and adopting successful policies practiced in other parts of the country.
"We have a tremendous housing problem and
thus far securing affordable housing in this region has been a story
of one step forward and two steps back," noted Cheryl Cort, Executive
Director of WRN. "For every new initiative, there are retreats
in affordable housing programs and spikes in market demand for housing.
We are offering four actions jurisdictions should take to increase the
amount of affordable housing."
WRN compiled the report to document the region's
gaps in affordable housing, and point to actions local government could
take to address the crisis.
The report found a significant need for affordable
housing for the very low income but also for many in our community with
moderate incomes, such as teachers, sales people and daycare workers.
The report also found a great disparity in the amount of affordable
housing in each jurisdiction relative to its population. The District
of Columbia and Prince George's County account for nearly half of the
affordable units in the region though they only have one third of the
region's population. While Fairfax County has only 12 percent of the
affordable housing supply, it has 23 percent of the region's population.
"Fairfax County falls the farthest short
in providing affordable housing. This pushes families with low to moderate
incomes farther from their jobs," said Cort.
One of the regional solutions called for in the
report is a fair share of affordable housing in each jurisdiction to
support the needs of residents and employers. Forcing people to live
far from where they work due to housing costs increases traffic, raises
overall household expenses, and reduces access to jobs.
Chris Zimmerman, Arlington County Board Member
said, "Ensuring that each of our jurisdictions provides a fair
share of housing for low- and moderate-income residents is clearly the
right thing to do. It's also a key component of a regional solution
to traffic congestion and air pollution problems. In Arlington we're
working to preserve and increase affordable housing opportunities throughout
our community, and especially in those areas with the greatest access
to transit."
WRN's report highlights four nationally recognized
affordable housing policies that if adopted by local jurisdictions can
significantly contribute to producing affordable housing in the Washington
metropolitan area. The report examines the performance of each of these
policies as implemented by local governments and points to opportunities
for these policies to be improved or adopted. The four key policies
highlighted are:
Inclusionary Zoning - Requiring market-rate
developments to include a percentage of low to moderate-income housing.
Dedicated Funding for Affordable Housing Trust
Funds - Allocating a reliable source of funding to produce and preserve
affordable housing.
Zoning for Housing Choices - Zoning that
encourages a diversity of housing types. This can include allowing accessory
apartments or "granny flats" as well as encouraging transit-oriented
development.
Affordable Housing Preservation - Policies
aimed at stabilizing affordable housing supply during rapidly changing
markets, including property tax relief, anti-displacement efforts, tenant
right to purchase, and moderation of rent increases.
David Flanagan, President of Elm Street Development,
noted, "As a developer who has worked extensively with Montgomery
County's inclusionary zoning requirement, I know that these kinds of
policies can work for local government, low income families and for
the developer. With proper legislative requirements on both the government
and the developer, we can both make money and provide affordable housing
for those in need."
The final finding of the report noted that while
a few jurisdictions have adopted some policies to address affordable
housing, no jurisdiction in our region has a comprehensive affordable
housing strategy.
The Report is available on the WRN website at:
http://www.washingtonregion.net/html/AffHsgProgRpt.htm
***********************************************************************
Way Beyond Zoning: Form-Based
Coding Shapes Good Places
By Ronald Eichner, WRN board member
Zoning has largely been a dismal failure in creating
good places, according to Geoffrey Ferrell. But there is a promising
alternative, and it was recently applied to Arlington County's Columbia
Pike corridor.
Presenting at "Way Beyond Zoning,"
the April 13 WRN Forum Geoffrey Ferrell, a leading practitioner, showed
how an innovative approach to zoning known as "form-based codes"
works. Sometimes called "smart zoning," this technique goes
beyond zoning, to do more than control inappropriate development, but
to encourage the making of good places. Tim Lynch, Executive Director
of the Columbia Pike Revitalization Corporation discussed citizen involvement
during the planning process and the economic development incentives
being employed along with the form-based codes in the Columbia Pike
corridor in Arlington.
Ferrell began his presentation with a discussion
of the failure of existing practices and traditional zoning with its
"hyper-controls on use and density." Notwithstanding the worthy
goal statements of twentieth century planning efforts, the results are
"dismal," typified by automobile dominated landscapes, sprawl,
the degradation of our environment and the social and experiential impoverishment
of daily life. A "disjunction between words and action" can
be seen in many aspects of his critique of the past 75 years of planning
history. Of the modern planners who would have replaced what they saw
as grimy city neighborhoods with tall residential buildings gleaming
in fields of green and connected by streamlined cars on beautiful elevated
highways, Ferrell recalls the sorry history of urban renewal, and notes
"We built Le Corbusier's vision and it ain't pretty." Of Euclidean
zoning with its emphasis on separation of uses and formulaic quantification,
he noted that "FAR and density should be predictable but rarely
are," illustrated by the one story building that covers a lot which
has the same density as a four story building set back from the street.
They have the same quantitative density, but very different urban form.
Tragically, we build what's in the zoning code; we follow the rules;
and wonder, "is that all there is?"
A code should "be thinking about the city,
the street" not technical specifications. Cities can be seen in
terms of form, management and density/use. The emphasis should be on
form to make good places. "Form trumps use and density" because
by controlling form you determine scale of a place, the kind of parking
you can have, the size of buildings, etc. and therefore limit non-residential
options to compatible uses.
Ferrell's form-based codes address the critical
elements of buildings that make a good street: height (the number of
floors and their height), siting (where does the building sit in relation
to the street), architectural elements (windows, doors, and how they
function), and uses (ground floor uses especially). Together these elements
create the urban form, which is the result of public policy and is "the
cake." The private sector brings architectural design, which is
"icing on the cake."
A failure of current zoning practices is the
focus on the block rather than the street. In traditional cities, different
streets have different character. A given block often has different
types of uses, building heights, or densities on each of its street
frontages. Current zoning practices tend to treat the entire block as
a homogenous unit, which may be easier for the planners, but certainly
doesn't make for a lively diverse urban environment.
Along Columbia Pike, the codes describe a neighborhood
of buildings three to eight stories, built to the sidewalk, with retail
uses on the ground floor below office and residential uses. Ground floors
are higher to accommodate shops and restaurants, with a lot of glass
to underscore the continuity of public activity inside shops and on
the public space of the sidewalk. Details such as second floor windows
providing Jane Jacobs' famous "eyes on the street" to the
inclusion of street trees to define and enhance the public space are
also included in the code. Architectural style is not mandated, but
durable urban materials are encouraged.
Tim Lynch reviewed a process that featured many
charetttes and community meetings designed to "find out what people
want rather than what they don't like about Columbia Pike." Participating
in creating design proposals, presenting their vision, and defending
those designs helped people work together productively. The resulting
Columbia Pike Masterplan grew out of the charettes and elaborate computer
visualizations of the transformation of Columbia Pike. The form-based
codes provide "rules for predictable growth' that would get the
community "the pretty pictures the architect showed us."
Arlington established economic incentives to
encourage developers to use the form-based codes (they are voluntary),
including speedy administrative approvals, since the planning and design
issues have been incorporated already; parking facilities supported
by tax increment financing; a commercial revitalization rehabilitation
tax exemption for smaller projects; and high technology tax incentives.
Lynch noted that the ease of use and predictability
of the form-based codes and the clarity of the economic incentives are
attractive to the development community, and many proposals are now
in the pipeline. Small sites are not required to provide on-site parking,
but can contribute to a fund. Ferrell added "Parking requirements
are evil," explaining that they are "designed for situations
which don't exist" in urban situations, where you do not drive
from a retail store to a restaurant, to your office, etc. Under typical
parking requirements, "your car has 4 or 5 spaces all over town."
Rather, we should think of parking as a community issue, a management
issue, primarily." Lynch believes that this approach to parking
in the Columbia Pike revitalization area has allowed smaller developers
to participate in the revitalization, and has contributed to, and reflects,
the diversity of the Columbia Pike community.
This event was the second of a five-part Spring
2004 Forum series called "Design Matters: Building Livability."
The series looks at approaches and solutions that create livable neighborhoods.
Recognizing that to be successful, transit-oriented development must
be more than building near a Metro, WRN encourages the creation of attractive,
convenient, diverse and walkable neighborhoods. The next Forum in series
is "Real Streets" with nationally recognized pedestrian expert
Dan Burden, May 18, see: www.washingtonregion.net.
***********************************************************************
A Time
to Choose Metro or Outer Beltways
Opinion by Stewart Schwartz, Coalition for Smarter Growth
The Intercounty Connector, Techway, and Western
Transportation Corridor, all components of a potential Outer Beltway
around Washington D.C., remain the top transportation priority of many
regional business and development industry leaders.
Collectively, these projects could cost as much
as $8 to 10 billion to construct. The ICC alone will cost at least $3
billion when financing costs are included and will involve borrowing
against Maryland's future federal transportation revenues.
At the same time, fixing a maintenance backlog
and meeting urgent demands from a growing ridership for Metro will require
$1.5 billion as soon as possible. Longer-term Metro needs have been
estimated to cost billions more. Rail to Tyson's Corner will cost $1.5
billion. Other key projects such as the Purple Line, a circumferential
transit line connecting the spokes of the Metro system and near-Beltway
job centers, face foot-dragging in Virginia and Maryland.
Any one of these major projects will likely require
a special federal earmark over and above the share of federal funding
given to each of the three jurisdictions. Let's also not forget that
VDOT's push for I-81 expansion has it seeking all of the $900 million
in national "truck-lane" funds proposed by the House of Representatives.
With Virginia and Maryland already the recipients of a $900 million
earmark for the Woodrow Wilson Bridge, it is highly unlikely that the
Washington, D.C. region will be able to win adequate federal funding
for all of the mega-projects on its wish list. Beyond federal money,
there's clearly not enough state or local money to both maintain/expand
Metro and build an Outer Beltway. Something will have to go.
The question for the business community and elected
officials is, "Will you make Metro or the Outer Beltway your funding
priority?"
It's about more than transportation dollars.
The choice made will determine where and how the region will grow and
who will benefit. In a recent study, Professor Robert Cervero concludes
that, "the dominant effect of building roads is likely to reshuffle
growth within a region, not to add jobs and households." This means
that a decision to build the ICC and Western Bypass would be a key determinant
of the location of future economic growth.
In "A Region Divided," the Brookings
Institution documented that the east side of the region represented
by Prince George's County, eastern D.C., and Northern Virginia Route
1 corridor, is falling behind the west in school performance, jobs,
economic investment, and tax base. The Outer Beltway would further shift
jobs and investment outward exacerbating this inequity and directly
threatening the economic future of D.C., Prince George's and Route 1
communities. Concurrent failure to invest in Metro would mean declining
service, loss of riders, and fewer Metro-oriented development projects.
Metro has warned of a "death spiral" without more funding.
Washington area residents, public officials and business leaders ought
to be concerned.
Instead of Outer Beltways, the region should
prioritize transit maintenance and investment to take advantage of the
amazing economic development potential represented by 114 Metro, MARC
and VRE stations. Prince George's and eastern D.C. have two-dozen Metrorail
and MARC stations with little to no development. Development at these
stations can spark reverse commuting in now-empty Metrorail cars improving
economic and transportation efficiency. A study of a regional transit-oriented
development future by the Chesapeake Bay Foundation and Environmental
Defense showed real reductions in driving and congestion, not to mention
the benefit of increased land protection, reduced air pollution, and
improved access to jobs.
For suburban areas without rail transit, encouraging
more walkable communities with a mix of homes, offices, retail, parks
and public services, combined with a better grid of local streets and
improved bus service would do more to reduce traffic and improve quality
of life than a sprawl-inducing Outer Beltway.
It's time to face fiscal reality, we cannot afford
both the Outer Beltway and Metro. We cannot afford to leave eastern
D.C. and Prince George's behind in economic growth. We cannot afford
outer beltways that magnify sprawl without reducing traffic congestion.
And we have an obligation to preserve and enhance the economic and social
health of our nation's capital. It's time for all of us, but especially
the powerful business community to choose.
******************************************************************************************
Dulles Rail: Halfway There but
Miles to Go
Opinion by Stephen Cerny and Chris Forinash, WRN Board members
A long discussed plan for a new Metro line to
Dulles Airport and beyond received a major boost on February 23 when
the Fairfax County Board of Supervisors approved the creation of a special
business tax district. That district would fund the 25 percent local
share of the project for a $1.5 billion first phase that would construct
a line from just east of the West Falls Church station, through Tysons
Corner, to Wiehle Avenue on the east side of Reston. A second phase,
currently without a funding plan, would extend the line to Dulles Airport
and Loudoun County. The tax district includes Tysons Corner and nonresidential
areas within about a quarter of a mile of the Dulles Toll Road to a
point approximately halfway between Wiehle Avenue and Reston Parkway.
An earlier version of the tax district approved by the Board of Supervisors
last year foundered when it was rejected by the Town of Herndon. That
proposal would also have funded a Metro extension to Wiehle Avenue,
but would have taxed commercial property owners as far west as Dulles
Corner, several miles beyond the Wiehle station. The Town of Herndon
rejected the earlier proposal because there was no guarantee that the
line would be extended beyond Wiehle in a second phase, even though
property owners in Herndon and the surrounding area would have contributed
to the cost of the first phase.
Advocates of the Dulles rail project envision
that an additional 25 percent of the cost of the project would be funded
by the Commonwealth of Virginia, mostly through increased vehicle tolls
on the Dulles Toll Road, and the remaining 50 percent by the federal
government.
We have wrestled with the question of whether
to support the Dulles rail project. On one hand, the line would provide
a much-needed public transportation alternative to the severely congested
Tysons Corner area and could encourage quality redevelopment in that
poorly planned, pedestrian-hostile environment. The project's potential
to foster sound mixed-use, transit-oriented, pedestrian-friendly redevelopment
around the rail stations in the Dulles corridor beyond Tysons Corner
would also be a welcome improvement over the existing situation. Indeed,
Fairfax County has amended its Comprehensive Plan to strongly encourage
such redevelopment in both areas. In Reston, the plan amendments have
the added advantage of encouraging the development of affordable housing
in the areas surrounding the proposed stations. These plan changes would
become effective once funding for the first phase of rail occurs.
However, there are drawbacks to the rail plan
that have prevented us from supporting it in the past. First, extending
Metro several miles into Loudoun County will surely promote additional
suburban sprawl, with its attendant environmental and infrastructure
problems. We generally believe that new development should occur in
established communities, especially around existing Metro stations,
where there is plenty of land to meet a significant part of the region's
growth needs for many years to come.
Another major area of concern is the cost of
the project. Devoting such a tremendous amount ($4 billion) of the region's
resources to a single project that would benefit a corridor that already
has a reasonable level of bus service, particularly in the Reston area,
seems to be a misuse of scarce resources that might be better utilized
elsewhere. A less costly alternative would be to extend Metro to Tysons
Corner only. The corridor beyond could be served by improved bus service,
and potentially new bus rapid transit (BRT) technologies. Reston already
has good local bus service, which could be improved even further, and
other areas such as Herndon and Oak Hill would benefit from the level
of service Reston already has. Better connections could also be provided
to the Fairfax County Government Center, Dulles Airport, George Mason
University, and other areas that are difficult to access by public transportation
at the present time.
By consuming a large share of the region's transit
resources, a Dulles line would exacerbate ongoing problems in the existing
Metrorail system. For example, the Orange line through Arlington is
currently at crush loads through much of the morning peak period. Feeding
additional traffic through this segment is not possible. Any funding
for the Dulles line would have to include significant upgrades to capacity
through this and potentially other "downstream" segments.
Dedicated maintenance funds also fail to cover the needs of the current
system. This problem must be solved before dedicating significant resources
to extending the system's reach.
In a December 2003 letter to Karl Rohrer, Dulles
Rail Project Manager for the Virginia Department of Rail and Public
Transportation, WRN expressed serious reservations with the Draft Environmental
Impact Statement (DEIS) for the project. We criticized the inequitable
local tax scheme, which ultimately made the original plan politically
unfeasible, and took issue with the DEIS's brush-off of BRT options,
which were never seriously considered.
Recent developments described above now suggest
that funding for the first phase of the Dulles rail project may be ready
to fall into place. We maintain that BRT should have been, and should
in the future be seriously considered as an alternative to heavy rail
west of Tysons Corner. Given these developments, we support the current
plan for phase one because it will bring Metro to Tysons Corner, where
it is sorely needed and would provide a strong incentive to redevelop
the station areas on a human scale. The potential for well-designed,
pedestrian-friendly, transit-oriented redevelopment that would include
a significant affordable housing component at the Wiehle station in
Reston, tips the balance in favor of the project. The plan would include
a smooth interface with feeder buses at the Wiehle station, which would
provide an incentive for automobile commuters living west of the station
to switch to public transit for the duration of their trips.
We still have serious concerns about a future
second phase of the project, which would extend the Metro line deep
into Loudoun County. Extending the line to Dulles Airport does not raise
as many objections, but the Loudoun County segment would, as discussed
earlier, induce sprawl and poor land use patterns in that area. The
two proposed stations would be difficult to access and would require
massive parking garages since just about everyone would need to drive
to the stations. Loudoun commuters would likely be much better served
by an improved bus and/or BRT system that would feed into the Metro
line in Fairfax County. If current budget trends continue at the state
and Federal level however, it is unlikely that a second phase of the
Dulles rail project would be seriously considered any time soon, so
stakeholders have a welcome chance to reevaluate corridor and regional
needs. Overall, the Washington region needs to invest in transportation
projects that improve transportation performance while supporting more
livable communities.
****************************************************************
Walkable
Community Workshops Come to the Washington Region,
WRN Co-hosts Three D.C./Prince George's Workshops
Between May 3 and 6, the Washington, D.C. region
will host Walkable Community Workshops in eight locations. The Metropolitan
Washington Council of Governments (COG) and the National Center for
Bicycling and Walking are sponsoring this series of half-day workshops
that are intended to promote active living through community and street
design. The instructors will be Peter Lagerwey of the City of Seattle
and Gary McFadden of the National Center for Bicycling and Walking.
WRN is coordinating three of the workshops with
local officials and community groups around the Minnesota Avenue, Fort
Totten, and Capitol Heights (on the Prince George's/D.C. border) Metro
stations. For details see: www.washingtonregion.net.
Workshop locations and dates: May 3, Landmark
Area of Alexandria; May 4, Richmond Highway (Route 1), Fairfax County;
May 4, Oxon Hill, Prince George's County; May 5, Olney Town Center,
Montgomery County; May 5, Long Branch area of East Silver Spring, Montgomery
Co.; May 6 Minnesota Avenue Station Metro Area; May 6, Capitol Heights;
May 7, Fort Totten. For more contact Michael Farrell at COG, 202-962-3760,
mfarrell@mwcog.org or Alphonso Coles at WRN, 202-667-5445, acoles@washingtonregion.net.
********************************************************************************
Events
April 24th to 28. American Planning Association
conference in Washington, DC. See: www.apa.org
Saturday, April 24, 9am-3:30pm. Workshop for
Neighborhood Leaders. The American Planning Association invites
you to attend this special workshop to learn how planning tools and
techniques can help you create and sustain viable neighborhoods. Omni
Shoreham Hotel, 2500 Calvert Street NW, Washington, DC. $35 registration
fee (includes lunch). See www.planning.org/2004conference/pdf/neighborhoodwkpbrochure.pdf.
Wednesday, April 28, 8:30am-12:00pm. Minority
Planning Summit. Hosted by the American Planning Association Omni
Shoreham Hotel, 2500 Calvert Street NW, Washington, DC. Free but registration
required. www.planning.org/2004conference/pdf/Minoritysummitbrochure.pdf
Wednesday, April 28, 7:00 - 8:30 pm. Modern-Day
Streetcars…Coming Soon to a Neighborhood Near You? Hosted by
the Citizens Advisory Committee of the National Capital Region Transportation
Planning Board. At Benjamin Orr Elementary School, 2200 Minnesota Ave
SE, Washington, DC. See www.mwcog.org.
May 3-6. Walkable Community Workshops.
The Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments and the National
Center for Bicycling and Walking are sponsoring workshops in the to
promote active living through community and street design. See www.mwcog.org
or http://www.washingtonregion.net/html/walkablecommworkshops.htm
May 6-8. America Walks Conference. The
National Congress of Pedestrian Advocates 2004 will discuss this year's
theme "Walking: Everybody's business-Revitalizing people and places"
at the Hilton in Silver Spring, MD. See www.americawalks.org
May 7th - Bike To Work Day, see: http://www.waba.org/new/bwd/index.php
May 18, Dan Burden, national authority
on bicycle and pedestrian facilities and programs on: "Real
Streets: New Approaches to Transportation." 6 pm, refreshments;
6:30 pm, program National Capital Planning Commission (NCPC) 401 9th
St., NW, North Lobby, suite 500. RSVP: WRN, 202-667-5445 or e-mail staff@washingtonregion.net.
Thank You's: WRN
wishes to thank the following friends of WRN for their generous contributions:
Grace Malakoff, Peter Harnik, Mayhood Company, David Frye, Steven C.
Hill, and David DeCamp.
Intersect staff: Cheryl Cort, editor; Stephen
Cerny, Stewart Schwartz, Christopher Forinash, Ronald Eichner, and Elizabeth
Cox contributing writers.
______________________________________________________________________________________
WRN advocates transportation
investments, land use policies, and community designs that enhance existing
communities and the environment of the Washington, D.C. Metro Region.
Comments
and articles welcome.
Washington
Regional Network For Livable Communities
1777
Church Street, NW, Washington, DC 20036
Phone: (202) 667-5445 Fax: (202) 667-4491
Email: staff@washingtonregion.net
Web:
http://www.washingtonregion.net
WRN Contribution Form
___
*** Add $20/person for Intersect to be faxed long-distance or mailed
(to cover costs).
Individual
Contribution Categories:
___
Limited Income $15
___
Basic Individual $35*
___
Supporter $80*
___
Sustainer $120
Organizational
Contribution Categories:
___
Small $60*
___
Basic $200 (Intersect sent
to up to 3 individuals* & recognition in Intersect 2x/year)
___
Sustaining $500
- Intersect sent to up to 15 individuals by email or local fax*
Please
attach separate sheet for additional persons:
Salutation: Mr. Mrs. Ms. Miss
Name:
Title:
Organization:
Address:
Email:
Home
Phone:
Work
Phone:
Fax:
Affiliation(s):
Send
WRN updates via:
___
email
___ regular mail
___
fax
___ do not send updates
___
Interested in volunteering. Please
contact me.
___
Please keep my name/information confidential.
Please
return this form with a check payable to WRN, 1777 Church St, NW, Washington
DC, 20036. WRN is a 501c(3)
non-profit organization and contributions are tax deductible to the
extent allowed by law. Thank
you!
________________________________________________________________________________________
| 