FLOG - the Friends of White Flint Blog

Has Sprawl Recovered Enough for the National Economy?

·Christopher LeinbergerVisiting Fellow, Brookings Metropolitan Policy Program·     
January 27, 2010 | 12:09 pm·   

A new study conducted by researchers from the University of Alabama and University of Florida, sponsored by the Natural Resource Defense Council , shows that car-dependent communities have statistically higher rates of mortgage foreclosure than communities with multiple transportation options, such as transit, biking and walking. This also explains to some extent why across the country that “walkable urban” home values over the past two years have been flat or slightly down while fringe “drivable sub-urban” communities have suffered the worst price declines. The average American household spends 17 percent of their pre-tax income on transportation, 94 percent of this amount is for ownership and maintenance of cars. However when the data are disaggregated, drivable sub-urban households spend about 25 percent on transportation while walkable urban households only spend about 9 percent. This 16 percent difference represents well over a trillion dollars in households spending each year. If this spending was redeployed from cars to housing, education, and savings, it would be a major economic driver (excuse the pun). 

The major implication of this study is on the largest peace-time intervention in the American economy by the federal government, and, no, it’s not the bank bailouts. As reported on the front page of the Washington Post earlier this week, the Federal Reserve, the Treasury, and Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac have spent well over $1 trillion over the past year in propping up the securitized mortgage market and assuming untold risk of further mortgage defaults in the future. This is more than the bailout of the banks, AIG, and the car companies combined.

This mortgage bailout and the assumption of huge future risks were made in the hope that troubled housing, much of it on the fringe, will stabilize and regain its value. To some extent, it is a bet that sprawling development will recover its previously inflated value, a wager I’d decline. The Post story also mentioned that these federal props are being dismantled and will be gone by the end of the first quarter of this year. Two months later, the federal tax credit for the purchase of new homes will end as well. The obvious question is whether the housing market can stand on its own or will it push the economy back into recession; the feared “W” scenario experienced in the 1930s and in the early 1980s. The worst outcome of all would be if the bailout of housing, and particularly sprawl, left us without the resources to invest, especially on infrastructure and transportation choices, in the future. 

Greg Trimmer

OK, so it wasn’t as dramatic as slicing the Gordian Knot.

It was more like one of those old-time logging rivers, clogged up with timber. Lumberjacks caper over the floating trees, picking and hauling at the downed trees, until one floating behemoth finally moves and releases the whole riverful of timber in a shuddering crash. In other words, the logjam breaks. That was today in the PHED Committee.

For months, the Planning, Housing and Economic Development Committee of the Montgomery County Council had tried to reconcile the older, car-oriented “quality of life” standards used to evaluate when development would be allowed to move forward against the newer, transit-oriented White Flint Sector Plan. Cars vs pedestrians. Suburban vs. urban. It all came down to a difference of a few seconds in travel through White Flint.

At today’s hearing, Committee staff recited a litany of attempts to break the logjam. They tried this and that and the other. Still couldn’t get the cars sped up enough.  Those darn cars just sat there on the Pike, not moving fast enough through the new White Flint of 2030.

Finally, the Committee and Planning staffs tried something entirely different: If you can’t get the cars moving fast enough through intersections, try getting the people out of cars in the first place.

So that was the resolution. They finally calculated if you could get enough people out of their cars on Rockville Pike, then the remaining cars could move fast enough.

At first glance, that seems obvious enough, but the problem is that if you don’t get them out of their cars the right way it wouldn’t work. It’s what happens on roads all the time: build new lanes to ease congestion, and they just fill right up again. Same thing if you just take some cars off the road.

So this only works if you entice people out of their cars; don’t just ban cars or build roads, but give people a reason not to drive. The technical name is “traffic demand management” and that’s what the solution was to the White Flint problem.

The beauty of that approach is that it is consistent with the new White Flint design. One of the major selling points about a compact, dense, walkable, transit-oriented New Urban community like the White Flint design is that there’s really no reason to drive for most of your needs. At the White Flint Plan public hearings before the County Council last year, prominent local realtor Jane Fairweather explained how that worked for her in renovated Bethesda: “if I didn’t have to use one for work, I wouldn’t even have a car.” And that’s what the White Flint planners were gunning for in their overall design.

Plus, there’s already good evidence that those increased “mode share” goals would be achievable in White Flint. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission, White Flint’s biggest employer, has already achieved a 50% mode share split (meaning more than 50 percent of its employees use something other than a car to get to work). And the new North Bethesda Center, the massive development rising at the Metro Station, has already committed to a 50% mode share split.

Hearing all that, the PHED Committee quickly put the issue to rest. Councilmember Marc Elrich, one of those most insistent on detailed transportation reviews, told the Commitee: “I’m comfortable with this. Let’s call it a day.”

It’s a good call.

Rather than fighting over a few seconds driving time in a new urban area, let’s look to something new. Let’s give people not only a reason to get out of their cars, but a way to do it in their everyday lives. Let’s build a New Urban center in White Flint, where we won’t add a lot of new cars because people, like Jane Fairweather said, won’t need them.

Barnaby Zall

Live blogging from the February 1, 2010 meeting of the Planning, Housing and Economic Development Committee of the Montgomery County Council on the White Flint Sector Plan. The Committee has just resolved its transportation concerns, and is now moving to the zoning and land use issues.

Committee staff Marlene Michaelson is working through her memorandum for the Committee. The memo is available here:

http://www.montgomerycountymd.gov/content/council/pdf/agenda/cm/2010/100201/20100201_PHED2B.pdf

At the Mall, there’s a zoning conflict with the Plan. Let me work through those there and on the JBG property. We’re going to continue to match height and zoning. Making sure we add text to the Plan where there’s a difference. Twenty years from now, you’ll want clarification. Achieve consistency where possible. Committee Chair Mike Knapp: can you highlight where those are in the Plan? Michaelson: sure.

Amenities list on P. 68: I think it’s critical we add detail to the list of amenities. Co-locating facilities should be indicated on this list. Floreen: I would like to emphasize the two-acre civic Green. Michaelson: that is something that would evolve as the Plan is implemented. Green space just south of the site. Floreen: we weren’t explicit in Silver Spring and we didn’t get it. Michaelson: so change the text on Page 30 of the Plan from “a one-acre Civic Green” to read “a one-to-two acre Civic Green.” Councilmember Roger Berliner: in Silver Spring, we had to preserve a place of nature, where people can feel connected the way they can’t in an urban environment. I’m going to work to ensure that this space is alive with nature, not just space. Piera Weiss, chief Planner for White Flint: we do recommend a public use space just north of Chapman. If you want to make that a public park, that would ensure that. Under the public use space requirements, you would get about a half-acre. Something that is required. Hanson: going back to P. 30. Complementary public use space on the south side to anchor. When you get to see what’s around it, it will vary up or down. Berliner: I’m more interested right now in the green space in addition to the Civic Green. I know we will add common spaces. Live spaces and green spaces can be the same or very different. I want to ensure that those common spaces are as green as possible. I don’t think the language ensures that result. Hanson: Pp 22-23, a discussion of public open space. the idea is to create both open and green spaces in each district, and to connect them as well. I’m an advocate for public parks, but I’m also leery of requiring public management because the costs are high. Michaelson: entirely possible to say the space would be a green amenity, which would achieve your goal. Knapp: this is something we need to be aware of when we look at financing. Raise these alternative mechanisms for all the amenities.

Bob Stoddard for Washington Real Estate Investment Trust: are you talking about our green space? Berliner: 1/2 acre of that seven acre parcel. Stoddard: consider the SHA space as a school site and green space. Berliner: that’s a good idea. Michaelson: we can add text that the Plan recommend that particular space be a green space. Floreen: this is not the sort of space I’m assuming would be part of the financing. I want to be sure we have adequate flexibility. Rollin Stanley, Planning Director: the CR Zone has incentives for those things. Floreen: the CR zone incentives are sufficient for the smaller as well as the larger spaces? Michaelson: we’ll clarify.

Public Housing goals: Michaelson: given the flexibility in the CR zone, some people think those goals will not be met. the staging plan includes those, but I would like to add language in the Plan to clarify that we’ll be keeping track of whether the Plan is keeping track of its housing goals as it builds up. Elrich: what if you issue some zone? Michaelson: the earlier in the process they apply, the more flexibility there will be.

Sustainability: Pp. 50-51 of the Plan. Some people have written to the Council saying that’s not enough. But there’s a limit on what a Plan can do. The Plan reflects the general goals and does a good job in not over-stepping what the Plan can do. May need to tinker in the CR Zone and the Plan depending on what the Council does. Berliner: I disagree. We should establish aspirational goals, but I get that the Plan is not an arbiter of those goals. But tree canopy, for example, should be established in the Plan. Most sustainable, smartest growth on the planet. It ought to be state of the art when it comes to sustainability and our transportation policy. Increase our tree canopy exponentially by getting rid of the asphalt we have today. I’ll continue to have conversations with staff and the Planning Board to see if there are ways to further strengthen our goals set forth in this Master Plan.  Michaelson: goals, not targets. Berliner: we need trees. They matter to all of us. Stanley: we’ll come back to you with something on trees.

Berliner: district heating? Stanley: new use of old idea. Central heating across several buildings. Greatly reduces energy use. Very common in older areas. coming back now because of bio-mass.

The Committee then finished its White Flint consideration and moved to the Gaithersburg West plan.

Barnaby Zall

The Planning, Housing and Economic Development Committee of the Montgomery County Council began its sixth hearing on the White Flint Plan, a bit later than scheduled, by reviewing a staff memorandum on Transportation issues before a packed hearing room. The memo is available here:

http://www.montgomerycountymd.gov/content/council/pdf/agenda/cm/2010/100201/20100201_PHED2A.pdf

Committee Chair Mike Knapp: this is an ongoing conversation. Achieving balance in this area would have required eliminating vast amounts of development, which didn’t make much sense. So more analysis have been done, and staff will tell us what else we could do.

Committee staff Glenn Orlin: increase mode share from 40% to 51%. Not enough to bring balance. Considered changing Montrose Rd and Rockville Pike (outside the sector), but the community reaction was negative. So proposed only doing the first phase of the Plan. The committee didn’t like that. Then reviewed the mode shares outside the Sector to determine if that would affect the calculations, but that didn’t make much difference. So finally we looked at mode shares in Bethesda and elsewhere, which increased the “balance” somewhat, but not to the 40% goal.

There is some precedent for setting a mode share point differently. we’ve pushed to the edge of the edge of the envelope of our development options, so the only thing left is mode share options.

Committee member Marc Elrich: I appreciate all the efforts, but the point is to get us to our level. The difference is about 1/4 of a mile per hour, so that’s pretty close. If we can hold this at 39%, there’s nothing to prevent us from doing something in future years to do even better. I’m comfortable with this. Let’s call it a day.

Councilmember Roger Berliner: I think there are legitimate questions about whether PAMR is an appropriate measure. We’ve been working for several months to make improvements in it. consensus that there will be changes to it. Ironic that even assuming it’s a bad test, we were able to take a bad test and achieve a good public policy with it. If we can’t make a good mode share split in 20 years, then shame on us. If we’re not able to make significant changes in 20 years to drive this mode share above where it is now, then shame on us. We have produced the optimal results here. And we’ll do better when we talk about a Bus Rapid Transit system that doesn’t just begin and end in White Flint, but serves more of our people. this is as good as we can hope to achieve. this is good for our citizens and good for Montgomery County.

Council President Nancy Floreen: neighborhood protection language? Recognizes that there will be protection as we move forward? Orlin: yes.

Knapp: So let’s move forward with three other issues.

Orlin: Woodglen Drive right-of-way would be 62′  for the entire block. Knapp: OK. Orlin: Old Georgetown Lane lanes from Executive Blvd to Rockville Pike. Harris Teeter is worried that reducing the number of lanes would reduce the number of people who cross the Pike on Old Georgetown. But the turn lanes would mean there are only two lanes now, so this would be no change. Mike Smith from LCOR (and a member of the Friends of White Flint board of directors): Harris Teeter strongly recommended the road be maintained in its current configuration. We are energizing the intersection, particularly on the east side of the Pike. But if we make it seem to be a less accessible path, it will hurt the transportation. Orlin: the reality is that it would have no impact on Harris Teeter at all. Floreen: so no change? Orlin: no. The through lanes will be reduced at some point, but the through lanes will not be changed. Floreen: pavement? Orlin: the through pavement will not be changed. Smith: P. 29 of the master plan shows change. Orlin: Only two of those lanes go through. Doesn’t reduce the capacity across the Pike. Smith: the ques will be longer on that side of the Pike, and that will reduce people crossing the Pike. Dan Hardy, chief transportation planner: we concur with council staff. The perception will be that the road is not so wide; that’s the idea because it’s supposed to be more walkable. And eventually we’ll change the alignment. It won’t affect people’s travel to Harris Teeter. Elrich: same configuration? Hardy: we’ll tighten up the intersection, but it will look the same.

Orlin: MARC station. Montouri property. Owner sent letter asking to reconsider the northern site, which would be on Montouri site. Staff recommendation is to put the MARC station on the Montouri, northern site. Much much closer to the center of the White Flint density. more than a half-mile from the Metro station, and separated by Nicholson Lane which is a pedestrian barrier. Floreen: how would the Planning Board recommend it? Planning Board Chair Royce Hanson: we had more discussion. The effect of putting it on the Montouri site is to have no station. Better off to have the southern site. The cost of the northern property is prohibitive. Floreen: we just got a letter from Randolph Hills Civic Association which says they came to an agreement with Garrett Park, which is welcome to see. I just didn’t want to do anything that affected Garrett Park, and that’s still my concern. Orlin: makes it harder to get a 50% mode share. Floreen: I’m good with not doing Montouri. Mr. Hoffman says ew may have an agreement. Knapp: if we’re waiting for Garrett Park, we can wait to hear. Elrich: station near Montouri is going to bring people in. Southern station is going to take people out; if you board there, you’re going to D.C. I imagine you will take more cars off the road southbound from the southern station, and more from northbound Pike from the northern station. Berliner: I hope committee will defer formal action on this issue. Planning Board says we’ll never get that site, and I think the other site is preferable. Potential for win-win by moving it to Nicholson Court site. Knapp: we’ll defer until we hear from communities.

Mike Smith from LCOR: bus bay issue. P. 54, second bullet. I think staff is ok with this. Change the plan so bus bays don’t have to be “at” the Metro Station, but can be “around” the station. Gives staff more flexibility. Orlin: how far? Smith: close proximity, maybe other side of the Pike. Orlin: needs to be where people have a clear path to the station. Across the street with an underpass is “at” but beyond that is “away.” Knapp: work with staff so we can bring that up. An issue that can come back.

Barnaby Zall

Live blogging from the February 1, 2010 meeting of the Planning, Housing and Economic Development Committee of the Montgomery County Council. The agenda today involves continued discussion of the White Flint Sector Plan; this is the sixth PHED Committee hearing on the White Flint Plan. One more hearing is scheduled on the Plan, for February 9.

One topic is expected to dominate today’s PHED hearing: “Land use/transportation Balance.” As discussed in several posts below, this is the question of whether the County will block further consideration of the White Flint Plan because cars are expected not to move fast enough through White Flint after the 30-year development of the area. The Committee and its staff have wrestled with this question for months. Today may be the day the Committee finally makes a decision.

Barnaby Zall