St. Elizabeths redevelopment; Geoengineering, really?; bag taxes; the urban future of India & China; and more!
December 28th, 2011
We’ve got a year-in-review post in the works that will highlight some of the most-read and most-shared blog posts from Region Forward over the past year. Look for that next week.
In the meantime, there’s a few current news stories that focus on issues we’ve blogged about this year. We thought we’d share these stories for some additional perspective on these issues:
“Cities Face Tough Choices as U.S. Slashes Block Grants Program” This New York Times piece outlines the impacts that reduced Community Development Block Grants (CDBG) funding is having on cities and their residents. Back in April, when Congress was debating whether to cut CDBG funding, Alicia Lewis warned that short-sighted cuts would have very negative results for productivity and prosperity.
Good news and bad news for redevelopment in Southeast Washington, DC. Mayor Vince Gray’s economic development team is “wooing” Microsoft to build a campus at St. Elizabeths in SE Washington as part of the city’s revitalization efforts for the area. The U.S. Department of Homeland Security is already confirmed to relocate its headquarters there, though it was recently announced that the DHS move would be delayed by 5 years. In April, regional planner John Mataya wrote about the efforts to build innovation cluster in SE Washington.
“[Indian] Government Plans New Urban Hubs Around Big Cities” This piece from The Times of India delineates some of the Indian government’s plans for handling its immense and rapidly growing urban population. India’s on track to overtake China as the most populous country in the world in the few decades, exactly at the same time that the world’s population is becoming majority urban for the first time in history. How countries like India and China manage their incredible growth is a key element in international efforts to combat climate change. If they manage it well, utilizing smart growth principles, they can emerge as leaders in this new urban world. If not, sprawl could proliferate on a scale that would make LA’s or DC’s traffic congestion pale in comparison.
The full impact of bag taxes. Montgomery County is set to implement its 5-cent tax on paper and plastic shopping bags beginning January 1, 2012. The move is aimed to reduce pollution and raise revenues and is modeled after the District’s bag tax that was introduced in 2010. While some have criticized the District’s tax for not raising enough revenue, back in May we encouraged people to consider the aims of the tax and to realize that lower revenues, in this case, is actually a sign of success.
Geoengineering – using technological solutions to modify the earth’s climate (or at least shield it from the effects of climate change) – is beginning to move from a somewhat fanciful theoretical concept to something we may actually have to consider, especially if the US and other major nations continue to drag their feet on emissions reductions. That’s a scary thought, given how little we know about what the side effects of geoengineering may be. Back in March we warned about the dangers of relying on technology alone to solve our climate problem.
Get involved and help make metro DC cleaner, greener, and more sustainable
December 22nd, 2011
The last time we put out a call here for public participation, you guys responded with lots of inquiries and helped us recruit some great members for the Region Forward Coalition.
That was the second time the blogosphere and twitterverse came through for us by finding some awesome talent for regionally-focused groups. Ready for round 3?
The Metropolitan Washington Air Quality Committee is recruiting new members for the Air and Climate Public Advisory Committee (ACPAC) for 2011. ACPAC advises on air quality, climate and energy, and environmental issues to several policy committees at MWCOG.
ACPAC represents diverse community interests and opinions and provides an opportunity to provide input to local leaders. Members represent communities across the region and come from a variety of backgrounds, such as the health, business, education, scientific, and environmental sectors.
Here’s some more details on ACPAC: It’s made up of 18 total members, six each from the District, Maryland, and Virginia. There are currently four spots open: two for MD and one each for DC and VA.
Some of the topics upcoming in 2012 for ACPAC include providing input on the National Capital Region Transportation Planning Board’s (TPB) Transportation Priorities Plan, the Climate Adaptation Guidebook for the metro Washington region, and the energy efficiency and sustainability outreach program currently under development.
Region Forward includes some very ambitious air quality and climate targets, like reducing greenhouse gas emissions by 20% below 2005 levels by 2020 and by 80% by 2050, as well as going above and beyond the federal standards for air quality. These targets are based on the science which says that these are the levels of emissions necessary to avoid the worst effects of climate change.
Meeting these targets won’t be easy, and everyone – citizen, corporation, and politician – has to be involved. Here’s a chance for RF followers to do so.
If you want to have a say in the local public policy process and help the region meet the RF goals for air quality and greenhouse gas emissions, here’s your chance. Please fill out the online interest form today or contact Maia Davis for more information. ACPAC is recruiting members through January 15, 2012.
HIV/AIDS: A major problem the DC region must overcome
December 21st, 2011
City rankings are abundant, measuring everything from how generous cities are in terms of charitable giving, how many dog parks and skate parks there have per capita, and how artistic cities are based on concentration of artists.
The Washington region often finds itself at the top of city rankings, for better or for worse. Just today, Richard Florida blogged at Atlantic Cities about how the DC area ranks the highest in the nation in terms of “economic advantage,” an index which includes “three measures of regional productivity and wealth: median household income, per capita income and average wages and salaries.”
On the other hand, we also often find ourselves sitting at or near the top of “most congested” rankings, with this year’s edition of the annual Texas Transportation Institute showing the DC region tied with Chicago as having the worst traffic congestion in the country.
Another area where metro Washington really needs to see some dramatic improvement is in relation to its rates of HIV/AIDS. Despite being the seventh largest region in terms of population, metro Washington has the third highest number of cumulative AIDS cases in the country. And it’s not just a problem in DC proper, 47% of the region’s AIDS cases are located outside the District of Columbia.
HIV/AIDS is, therefore, a regional epidemic. And lingering stigmas and misinformation are continuing to fuel the epidemic. Although the number of newly diagnosed AIDS cases in the region declined from 1,320 in 2006 to 842 in 2009, that’s still far too many. That’s why the Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments (COG) and several other sponsors recently held a Regional HIV/AIDS Forum to devise a regional strategy to combat HIV/AIDS in metro Washington.
Jeffrey Crowley, Director of the Office of National AIDS Policy, was one of the speakers at the Forum and he emphasized President Obama’s commitment to fighting the virus, noting that even as other areas have experienced funding cuts, HIV/AIDS research and treatment has received increased funding during his administration. Crowley also noted that his office was in the process of creating the first National HIV/AIDS Strategy with the primary goals of reducing infections and increasing access to care and treatment for people with HIV/AIDS.
An expert panel including health officials from Montgomery, Prince George’s, and Fairfax Counties, and the District of Columbia discussed issues related to HIV/AIDS prevention and treatment in metro Washington. All of the speakers noted that stigma associated with the virus, by impeding treatment, remains a major barrier to reducing new HIV infections. They all also emphasized the fact that the virus knows no boundaries, reinforcing the regional nature of the epidemic.
There are, however, imbalances in how and the speed with which treatment occurs throughout the region. Dr. Mohammad N. Akhter, Director of the DC Department of Health indicated that Mayor Vincent Gray is working to bring President Obama into a Regional HIV/AIDS Strategy, modeled partly on the national strategy, which would start by performing a treatment and needs assessment as a region.
The forum, which was attended by 100+ experts, officials, and community members, was a first step towards building a regional strategy to combat the HIV/AIDS problem in metro Washington.
For more information about the regional HIV/AIDS strategy contact Carla Sanchez, a health planner at COG. Below is a clip from ABC 7 about the Forum:
What Does Transit Do For Regional Mobility?
December 16th, 2011
Justin Antos, WMATA Office of Long-Range Planning
One of the best ways to understand the value of something is to take it away, and measure the difference. So, as part of our “Business Case” for transit study, we tried taking away transit to see what happened to the Washington DC region, using MWCOG’s Regional Travel Demand Model.
This model represents people’s origins and destinations, and all the different options for getting around, including detailed transit and highway capacity information. What does that model predict would happen without transit?
This study measured transit’s impact on congestion, roads, and parking in the Washington region.
(Results shown here show the impact of all regional transit, including Metrorail, Metrobus, local/regional bus, MARC, and VRE services. Metro represents about three-quarters of regional passenger-miles traveled).
No Additional Roads: First, we looked at what would happen if everyone were able to respond to the loss of transit by choosing different destinations and travel patterns. That is, transit is removed, no new roads are built, but people are allowed to choose to work and shop at different locations as a result of changing congestion. In modeling terminology, we allowed the trip table to change. As a result:
Vehicle-miles traveled would increase by 7-8%;
Congestion would increase by 25% across the region. Some people would notice little change in their commute, but some would spend a lot more time sitting in traffic – but on average, travelers would spend 25% more time in congestion;
The added time and fuel wasted in congestion would cost travelers over $1.5 billion annually;
Traffic worsens so that residents make many fewer trips across county and state boundaries, indicating that our regional economy becomes fragmented:
1. Workers have fewer job opportunities to choose from because many are too far from home. Employers have a smaller pool of employees to choose from.
2. More trips stay local. For example, trips from Maryland and Virginia to DC drop 5-11%, and trips between Maryland and Virginia in the Compact area drop by 12-19%
We fracture into several smaller regional economies, and lose the competitiveness of our regional economy.
The scenario shows that Metro plays a critical role in keeping the region moving forward. Beyond diverting 7-8% of vehicle-miles traveled off the road, transit’s impact on congestion in Washington is several times greater than its current mode share. Transit carries significant number of people at exactly the times and places when our roads are at capacity. Our region’s roads are so congested that even a little bit more traffic can cause instability and slow everyone down. Transit benefits many in the region, even those who have never set foot in a bus or train.
Additional roads that would be required without transit in the Washington region. Thicker lines indicate number of lanes required. Total pavement required would be roughly the equivalent of two additional Capital Beltways.
Build Additional Roads: Second, we looked at how much additional road and parking infrastructure we would need to handle the additional traffic if transit were not available. In the model, we turned off transit, held travel patterns constant, and added lanes to each and every road in our network until every segment regained today’s levels of congestion. The results:
The region would need over 1,000 lane-miles of new pavement, on freeways and arterial roads:
1. The equivalent of two additional Capital Beltways
2. Potomac and Anacostia River bridges would need 4-6 additional lanes each
Significant new road capacity would be required where expansion would be expensive and/or controversial, e.g. Constitution Avenue NW;
The cost to build the roads, excluding the cost of land, would total $6.7 billion (this number assumes greenfield construction costs, and excludes public and private operating costs);
We would need 200,000 additional parking spaces in the D.C. and Arlington core:
1. The equivalent of 166 city blocks of five-story parking garages
2. At a cost of $4.1 billion
These findings put Metro’s role in context – two Beltways’ worth of pavement, and blocks and blocks of parking downtown are a visual representation of Metro’s impact on the city.
Plans in the 1960s and 70s called for a highway through downtown Washington. Map adapted from “District of Columbia Interstate System 1971,” November 1971, De Leuw, Cather Associates and Harry Weese & Associates, Ltd.
“But That Would Never Happen!” Imagining a Washington without public transit is, of course, a hypothetical situation. Without transit, Washington would look very different than it does today. Land use patterns would be different. But to understand transit’s role in the region today, we must compare it to some other alternative – a counterfactual is a key part of economic impact analysis. Predicting the effects of removing public transit is a good way to understand the role that transit plays today, and helps inform future planning.
Also, the idea of a Washington blanketed with significant parking and highways may not be so far-fetched. Many American cities are home to substantial parking lots and highways today. In the 1960s and 70s, plans called for major highways through downtown Washington, such as the one at right.
In the end: While transit has helped us avoid auto congestion, roads, and parking, it has also had other impacts as well. Transit has helped keep Washington moving and growing in a way that avoids significant roadway and parking infrastructure, has preserved valuable land for economic development, and has allowed our region to expand and compete as a single, connected economy.
Read the study’s Executive Summary (pdf).
Cross-posted at PlanItMetro
What Value Does Metrorail Bring to Land Markets?
December 13th, 2011
Justin Antos, WMATA Office of Long-Range Planning
A Metrorail station can make the land surrounding the station much easier to get to and from. Especially if traffic is bad and parking is costly, as often happens in our region, a Metrorail station can offer a good alternative means of getting to and from an area, which gives the area near rail an advantage over areas farther from rail.
Businesses can locate near a Metrorail station and reach workers around the region, more people can live in the neighborhood and get around by transit, and customers can shop or run errands there. Economic theory tells us that the value of land around rail stations should reflect the value transit brings, as often does the density of development. Economists would say that the accessibility value of transit is capitalized into the land value.
To measure Metro’s impact on land markets, we analyzed property value assessment records across the region. Shown above is a sample from the District of Columbia.
But what is this effect around Metrorail stations, and how much is it worth? How much land value is associated with Metrorail, and how much property tax revenue does this generate for Metro’s jurisdictions?
To answer, we analyzed parcel-level property assessment values across the WMATA Compact jurisdiction as part of our “Business Case” for transit study. We analyzed all properties, including residential, commercial, and federal office buildings. The data show that:
1. Metro enables value-creating activity: $235 billion of property value sits within a half-mile of Metrorail station
2. About 80% of this value is from commercial properties (multi-family residential, office, retail, and other)
3. 28% of the Compact Area’s property tax base sits on 4% of its land within a half-mile of Metrorail
4. The land within a half-mile of Metrorail stations generate $3.1 billion in property taxes per year for our funding partners
New York Avenue station has helped enable valuable development. Photo courtesy of NCPPP, click for context.
This does not mean that Metro caused all of this development, but it does show that Metro serves the value-creating parts of our region. Some of this development existed before Metrorail, and influenced the decision of where to build stations. So, we ran a number of hedonic analyses (a statistical regression technique) to isolate the effect on property values uniquely from Metrorail proximity alone, or the “rail premium.” After all, property values can be influenced by a variety of factors, including proximity to other infrastructure, desirability of the neighborhood, etc. Controlling for all other factors, we found that within the Compact area:
1. Metrorail boosts property values, adding 6.8% more value to residential, 9.4% to multi-family, and 8.9% to commercial office properties within a half-mile of a Metrorail station – all other things being equal
2. Property becomes even more valuable as a property gets closer to Metro stations
Others have shown too that new Metrorail stations can attract and spur economic development, by tracing the history of development around stations, such as New York Avenue and the Rosslyn-Ballston corridor.
These findings show that Metro plays a significant role in our region’s land markets: not only is valuable development and economic activity clustered around Metrorail, but the benefits of Metrorail can be seen in actual property assessments. Our regions’ land markets recognize and have responded to the value that Metro brings. This helps make the case that Metro is vital to the region’s economy, and is a good investment of public funds.
Read the study’s Final Report (pdf).
Cross-posted at PlanItMetro
