Rock Creek Park is an urban jewel. But as trail closures worsen, is it at risk of neglect?

For Rock Creek Park hikers and bikers, sites like this have become common recently. (Photo by me)

The U.S. National Park Service (NPS) advertises Washington, DC's Rock Creek Park as an "oasis in the city." As someone who lives right next to the park, I can attest that this is true. Just a few steps from my apartment, I can descend into the forest and hike for hours on end surrounded by our region's natural state, only to emerge at a Silver Spring brewery or a Georgetown restaurant. Though I'm from California, with all its majestic scenery, Rock Creek's beauty suffices for the lack of a bus or rail route from DC to Shenandoah, our closest full-scale national park.   

But over the two years I've lived here and fallen in love with the park, I've noticed more and more obstacles blocking my path, inflicting needless stress on what should be relaxing weekend walks. Impacts from heavy summer rains, a construction project for car commuters, and an impasse between a transit agency and historical preservationists have conspired to make it extremely likely hikers and bikers will encounter detours, regardless of their route. 

In trying to mitigate these impacts, NPS seems to have lost sight of its mission to "preserve unimpaired the natural and cultural resources and values of the National Park System for the enjoyment, education, and inspiration of this and future generations." With a few small adjustments, they can do much better.

Out of the creek, into the tunnel

Is Beach Drive's Zoo Tunnel an"oasis in the city"? (Photo by me)

From around Klingle Road south, trail routing unfortunately forces pedestrians and cyclists to travel quite close to car traffic on Beach Drive and Rock Creek Parkway. One pleasant reprieve from this is the stretch past the National Zoo, where the trail hugs the creek while cars head through the Zoo Tunnel. 

But early last week, high waters damaged this stretch of the trail, as Rock Creek siphoned runoff from heavy rains toward the Potomac. Though I'm not sure as to the full extent of the damage (I could see a downed tree blocking the path from one of the blocked gates), the Washington Area Bicyclist Association (WABA) has warned that repairs could take as long as a year.  

In the meantime, trail users have been detoured onto the narrow Zoo Tunnel sidewalk. As can be seen as right, this is a bad situation, both from a health perspective (I could feel the exhaust and fumes hurting my lungs as I walked) and from a traffic safety standpoint (I don't think that barrier would be of much help if one of those drivers lost control of their vehicles). Walking through the tunnel certainly is not the experience park visitors expect. 

There are no comparably safe north-south cycling routes that parallel the closed trail through this area of Northwest DC and offer a viable alternative to the tunnel – nearby, but hostile Connecticut Ave and 16th St certainly do not. However, for drivers, those wide arterial boulevards are reasonable, if not preferable alternatives to narrow, two-lane Beach Drive. They helped absorb the latter road's traffic when it was closed for a major rehabilitation project in 2016-2017. 

To help drivers and cyclists share the pain of the trail closure, NPS could learn from one of WMATA's primary strategies to keep trains running during construction: single tracking (or in this case, technically "single laning"). Specifically, one lane of the tunnel could continue carrying car traffic, in alternating directions, while the other is dedicated entirely to cyclists and pedestrians, with clear signage dedicating separate space to the two different modes. 

If implemented effectively, single-laning would impact drivers minimally. During rush hour the car lane could be signalized to continuously carry peak-direction traffic, while parallel roads and temporary increases to bus service (akin to those helping mitigate the ongoing Red Line closure) could absorb lost car capacity at other times. And while not as ideal for park visitors as the creek-side trail, it would be far preferable to the dangerous environment they are currently subjected to.  

And who knows? Maybe implementing this measure would increase public pressure to expedite trail repairs, perhaps encouraging NPS and the National Zoo to complete them as rapidly as the two-week "emergency" repairs planned for nearby Broad Branch Road, which was damaged by the same floodwaters.                     

         

While flood damage blocks the way south, road renewal block the way north

The National Park Service expected Rock Creek Park hikers and bikers to detour via city streets, rather than cross a single Beach Drive bridge in a construction zone. They were wrong. (Photo by me)

NPS's above-mentioned Beach Drive Rehabilitation Project has progressed, with the latest phase closing a 2.7-mile stretch of the two-lane road through fall 2019. Due to concerns regarding maintenance equipment, the agency has elected to close under-construction sections of the roadway not just to cars, but also pedestrians and cyclists.

According to NPS's public advisory on the project, the ongoing construction blocks all east-west crossings of DC's northern portion of the park, except for one major through road close to the Maryland border. However, the advisory's wording fails to clarify that north-south trail hiking along the creek, which requires use of a single Beach Drive bridge just north of Military Rd, is also no longer possible due to the detour. 

The alert, however, does specify a detour route for pedestrians and cyclists – they're to head straight out of the park at the southern end of the closed segment, then walk or bike along city streets all the way to the Maryland border. No alternate route is specified for people not wishing to hike all the way to Maryland. 

This isn't the time or place to debate whether National Park funds should go toward giving transit-averse car commuters from suburban Maryland wishing to avoid a few 16th St or Connecticut Ave stoplights a slightly smoother ride to downtown. It's true that Beach Drive doesn't even carry a bus route, and there's certainly a valid argument that converting it to a bike path would yield optimal benefits for the public. But since construction has started, it's likely going to get finished. 

It must be possible to complete the project in a manner that doesn't cause such an extreme disruption, especially given that, despite the presence of construction equipment, Beach Drive is arguably safer during construction than when open to cars. The closed bridge blocking hikers' way has sidewalks on both sides, and it's possible for pedestrians to proceed through the area without even entering the roadway. However, it appears NPS didn't consider possible ways to keep at least one of the two walkways open and safe, instead just blindly implementing blanket closures.

Few park visitors seem to be following NPS's orders. As can be seen in the photo above, taken around a week after the current phase of the rehabilitation project began, the temporary fencing blocking the path had been dismantled before I'd even encountered it. 

Since people tend to take the most practical, direct route from A to B, rather than adhere to others' wishes, the Park Service should do its best to ensure they're able to cross the construction zone safely.               

Bureaucracy blocks the way to Georgetown

DC Transit's Route 20 streetcar hasn't run between Georgetown and Glen Echo for nearly 60 years. But thanks to a trestle it ran on, forget running through Glover Archbold Park today. (Photo courtesy of Mark Lieberman, The Current)

Another trail closure obstructs the southern end of the Glover Archbold Trail, which runs through Rock Creek's satellite park of the same name. At around two years old, the blockage just west of Georgetown University's campus is the longest-running of the Rock Creek Park closures (at least as far as I know), and an administrative dispute is to thank. 

Ironically, a bit of DC's transit history – specifically, an abandoned railroad trestle that carried Streetcar Route 20, once a trunk line connecting the city's urban core to an amusement park in outlying Glen Echo, MD – is at the root of the problem. The trestle, which closed in 1962 and subsequently was passed down to WMATA, now lies in such disrepair that the transit agency has deemed it at risk of "imminent collapse." Due to this risk, the path beneath it is closed to hikers, who (akin to the Beach Drive pedestrian/cyclist detour) are diverted out of the park to city streets. 

If our mid-20th century transportation planners had been semi-competent, the riverfront streetcar line would still operate today and the bridge would be maintained to 21st-century safety standards, averting the problem. But today, transit in the DC region faces much more pressing needs than restoration of Route 20, so the abandoned trestle – while a glimpse of the nightmarish fate some private interests hope befalls our Metro – does not have any practical modern-day function. 

Thus, the logical solution, which WMATA favors, is simply to tear the bridge down and reopen the path. If funding ever materializes for a westward bicycle or pedestrian connection from Georgetown, or even a new rail corridor replicating the old streetcar route, constructing a new bridge would make more sense than rehabilitating the derelict one.   

But the DC Preservation League has other ideas, and has utilized the city's Historical Preservation Act to stall the project. Meanwhile, us hikers and pedestrians are left in the lurch, waiting for government bureaucracy to function.      

    

Our government should embrace Rock Creek Park for the urban gem that it is

You may need to hop a fence or two, but Rock Creek Park still is a great place for an evening walk (Photo by me) 

While the direct causes of Rock Creek Park's three major ongoing trail closures differ, the closures reveal a deeper systemic problem: Park Service officials seem to have forgotten why their agency was created, and why it remains funded even in an increasingly hostile political environment. In trying to keep visitors safe, they've created an unpleasant environment, forcing people to make potentially dangerous decisions and violate the law just to get where they need to go. 

Instead of neglecting its system of lush corridors that stretches throughout Northwest DC, NPS officials and their local counterparts should promote the park as a crown jewel of urban sustainability. No other city I know of – not places with top-notch multimodal transportation such as Paris or Seoul, nor areas with legendary urban waterfronts such as San Francisco, Chicago, or San Diego – has anything remotely comparable or extensive. They could learn a lot from what DC has done. 

But for this to happen, our trails have to be open.          

Memories of a surreal, emotional Lyft ride have me questioning ride hailing, others' honesty, and my own heart

A lack of late-evening bus service necessitated a 4 mile walk across the Arthur Ravenel Jr. Bridge from Charleston, SC to my hotel in Mount Pleasant. My Lyft ride to Charleston's train station the next night also crossed this bridge. (Photo by me) 

This week has not been a good one for Uber and Lyft. Data revealed that their shared-ride services are increasing traffic congestion and making it more difficult to get around dense urban areas, proving that I'm not just imagining the chaos I've seen them inflict on city streets.

But sometimes I have little choice but to use a ride-hailing app, mainly when work or family obligations take me to extremely auto-dependent places. One such location I traveled to last year was Charleston, South Carolina, for a cousin's baptism. 

As usual for such locations, I experienced plenty of “it’s so bad, it’s funny” transportation moments, such as a 3.5-mile midday walk to my relatives’ suburban residence from the nearest bus stop, followed up by a 4-mile walk that night – necessitated by a lack of late-evening bus service and featuring a sidewalk-less stretch of high grass filled with biting insects – over the long Arthur Ravenel Jr. Bridge leading back to my hotel. 

These experiences were a bit of a letdown, given that the Lyft driver who picked me up at the city’s Amtrak station when I arrived had told me that Charleston was voted the "number one" city in the world (lesson: don't use Travel & Leisure magazine to choose my destinations!) before launching into a list of questionable statistics about the city that I didn’t ask to hear. The most memorable of these bizarre statistics: a supposed “six-to-one” female-to-male ratio that, he explained, encouraged the local women to stay in “great shape” so they can “score a boyfriend.”   

Despite these odd events I had a great time with my relatives, and all too soon it was time for me to head back to DC. I was to catch an overnight train back to Union Station, from which I could walk to my office on Monday morning. With viable transit lacking, ride hailing was the only transportation option available for the 10-mile trip to the train station. 

***

The Lyft ride to the station started out pretty normally: the driver missed the turn to the street I was waiting on, made a couple U-turns, came back to pick me up, and we were on our way.

But things quickly turned surreal when, a few minutes into the trip, she began telling me her recent life story. To say the least, life has not dealt her a good hand recently:

• Two of her relatives were struck and killed by a drunk driver several weeks earlier, causing her to fly from her home in the Tampa, FL area to Charleston to help her family out
• Soon after she left Florida, Hurricane Irma hit and destroyed all of her property
• After the hurricane, her bank account was frozen due to an issue at her bank, so she is driving for Lyft in hopes of making enough money to pay off her insurance deductibles stemming from the storm damage
• Despite working long hours daily, her earnings from ride hailing are meager. As she put it, “Lyft sucks.” 

As a passenger, it was difficult to think of a proper response for this situation; all I could do was suggest she stay strong and reassure her that everything would turn out okay.

Otherwise, it was a pretty normal app-hailed ride – as we approached the train station, the driver missed a turn. Then, the app inexplicably instructed her to get on a freeway and head to central Charleston (the station was in outlying North Charleston). Fortunately, we were able to find the station on Google Maps, and soon we arrived.   

The ride was over, but as Amtrak's Silver Meteor rolled through the early fall night, I continued to reflect on it. The main question nagging me: was her story true? 

I wanted to believe her, because I want to believe people are inherently good. But there were a couple of holes in her story that continued to give me pause, making me whether it was an element of some sort of scam. 

For instance, Hurricane Irma didn’t hit Tampa directly. The driver said that damage from the storm had something to do with her bank account being frozen but did not explain this clearly. And why would she feel compelled to tell a random stranger she had only met a couple minutes prior about such tragic, emotional personal events?

***

Regardless of whether or not her story was true, one thing she said is certain: Lyft sucks. 

If she was telling the truth, it is yet another example of ride-hailing companies taking advantage of people desperate to get back on their feet, misleading their drivers into thinking they can make a living wage when in reality they care little about them. If she was not telling the truth and is trying to scam riders, Lyft’s applicant screening process and background check failed once again.

This was not my first questionable experience with a ride-hailing app, but it reinforced my view of the industry. Rather than tolerating purported “disruptions” intended to benefit only a few individuals, we should systematically encourage innovation and use new technology to enhance our transportation systems in a manner that maximizes public benefit. 

And as part of this enhancement, we have to ensure that the men and women who operate and maintain our transportation systems are not exploited. 

***

I tipped my Charleston Lyft driver the same amount (around 15%) that I would tip any other ride-hailing driver, but was left wondering whether or not I am a bad person for questioning her story. Am I?  

What is a transportation "disruption," exactly?

ATU Local 689, which represents employees of DC's WMATA, posted a flyer at a Dunn-Loring Station bus stop protesting proposed cuts to transit service. Route 2T, which served this stop, was cut five months later. Impacts of disruptive Silicon Valley companies were cited as a reason for the cuts. (Photo by me)  

You may not know it yet, but your mobility is being disrupted, whether you like it or not. If the ones doing the disrupting are to be believed, we should just sit back, relax, and watch them philanthropically fix all of our transportation problems.  

Who are these Great Disruptors, heroically and selflessly coming to our rescue? To date, they're all transportation network companies (TNCs), the formal term for app-based, Silicon Valley-headquartered ride hailing firms such as Uber and Lyft. 

But with autonomous vehicles and their magical traffic-solving abilities on the way, we're under orders to believe that TNCs are just the beginning. Though the End of Traffic apparently won't make highway expansion obsolete, we're under orders to pave over our railways and retrofit our signalized intersections to allow for constant flow of cars in all directions (no crosswalks or bike lanes necessary) in preparation for utopia. 

And eventually, all of this disruption will itself be disrupted, because we'll all work remotely and live in virtual reality, rendering physical transportation and in-person interaction completely unnecessary. Yep, our holodecks will never break down!

When you're told your transportation route is "disrupted," what's your first thought?

Whether you're a transit rider, car driver, cyclist, or pedestrian, here and there your preferred route gets disrupted. Unfortunately, this type of disruption is different than the technological type that's received so much hype. Your route's shortcomings – be they due to aging rail infrastructure, traffic-delayed bus service, or car crashes – don't all get solved, but instead rear their ugly head and prevent you from getting where you need to go. 

Needless to say, this type of transportation service disruption is something we strive to eliminate, rather than encourage more of.   

Are Silicon Valley-promoted disruptions to transportation at all preferable to those we already deal with?

The frustrating transportation experiences described above certainly fit the Oxford Dictionary's definition of a disruption – a "disturbance or problems which interrupt an activity, event, or process." But can such disruptions ever be a good thing? 

Given that the Silicon Valley's own transportation system is currently among the developed world's most dysfunctional, any attempt by their companies to spread their area's mobility shortcomings and disrupt other places likely won't end well. Unfortunately, many results thus far of their TNCs' efforts to disrupt – including increased traffic congestion, distracted driving, and transit service cuts – reflect these fears. On routes like Metrobus's 2T in Fairfax County, VA, the once-rare service disruptions riders dreaded suddenly became a permanent reality. 

Some of the disruptive Silicon Valley proposals for the more distant future sound even more nightmarish. Yes, one day, we may have technology so advanced that we can lose ourselves in virtual reality simulations that resemble the real world or allow nonstop car flow through intersections in all directions. But we should not blindly redesign our world to force everyone to tolerate such environments just because they're feasible, just as we choose today not to allow cars to travel at NASCAR speeds on freeways, build high-density skyscrapers in our national parks, or use chemical weapons to win our wars only because we can.      

Some disruptions lead to improvements, while others cause great harm

Sometimes, it is necessary to interrupt an activity, event, or process. For example, sports teams must make smart mid-game adjustments to achieve victory, while countries sometimes must replace corrupt leaders to avoid long-term consequences to their economic and political stability.

In the transportation sector, examples of such necessary, beneficial disruptions include redesigns of bus systems to reflect modern-day demand, rail infrastructure renewal programs...and TNCs' disruption of the American taxi industry. A simple regulatory overhaul that facilitated more extensive, affordable, transit-integrated taxi service without upending hard-working drivers' lives would have been ideal. But people deserved better ride-hailing options that realistically, especially in low-density metropolitan areas, likely never would have come into existence without the rise of TNCs. 

The only disruptions to transit worth considering are those that make it better

Making taxis more readily available, affordable, and easier to hail was a disruptive, but logical approach to improving that mode. But taking our high-capacity transit away and telling riders to take to already-congested roadways doesn't make any more sense than forcing them to tolerate more track problems or bus breakdowns. 

Instead, the tech industry should disrupt transit as it did taxis, by using technology to address present-day shortcomings. Possible solutions to consider include more efficient bus and rail dispatching systems, more accurate real-time info, smarter route alignments, and seamless multimodal integration. 

But any disruption to transit that is not an improvement is not one I can accept.            

        

  

    

No #FakeNews here: DC and New York's transit systems face similar challenges. But thanks to cultural differences between the two cities, their newspapers portray those challenges very differently.

Newspaper recycle bins in a DC Metrorail station encourage riders to read the Washington Post and use transit (photo courtesy of Green Talk)

Washington D.C. and New York City boast two of the world’s best newspapers, brimming with elite journalists dedicated to reporting and analyzing the actions of those in power. Over the past year, the staffs of the New York Times and Washington Post have worked tirelessly to report on the latest developments as one of the most bizarre eras in the country’s political history has unfolded.

The two cities also boast large transit networks featuring extensive rail lines, countless bus routes, and vehicles packed with passengers, ensuring the country’s political and financial halls of power can function effectively. On any given day, the performance of the Washington Metro or New York City Subway likely plays a larger role in Post and Times readers’ quality of life than any tweet originating from the White House or Mar-a-Lago.  

Washington and New York’s transit systems may not look, feel, sound, or smell the same, but both serve as examples of the challenges our country’s infrastructure faces. Both regions struggle to reliably fund, operate, and maintain their systems, creating service reliability issues that make frustrated riders envious of the first class transit infrastructure residents of other developed countries enjoy.

The two papers’ approaches to transit coverage differ substantially, a dichotomy that in many ways reflects the two cities’ cultures. The Post takes a highly critical approach, treating WMATA and other area transit providers much as it treats embattled politicians and federal agencies. In contrast, the Times has chosen a more systemic approach, analyzing the reasons for and potential solutions to MTA’s struggles while emphasizing the substantial harm continued declines in subway and bus service would inflict on New York’s economy and quality of life.

As someone who supports transit and wants to see it improve, I find the Post’s coverage stress-inducing, but the Times’s coverage inspiring.

The Post: In a city of scandals, transit reporters strive to uncover controversy

During DC happy hour, downtown bars are abuzz with talk of the government’s latest scandals and gossip. Be it the ongoing Mueller investigation, Anthony Weiner’s illicit texts, or corruption in the Navy, there are plenty of juicy and entertaining discussion topics available to break the ice over beers with co-workers.

Washington Post reporters strive to be the first to discover the next stunning revelation that will become the talk of the town. The more prestigious the topic the paper assigns them to, the better their chances of attaining fame. David Fahrenthold, who once covered DC’s police department, rose through the ranks to receive a coveted assignment covering Donald Trump and won a Pulitzer Prize in 2017.

In the journalism world, a seat in the White House Press Room is much more prestigious than one at a WMATA board meeting. But given its bureaucratic flaws, the transit agency offers aspiring investigative reporters the opportunity to prove their worth and potentially move on to bigger things.

Thus, the Post treats area transit providers similarly to embattled politicians or scandal-plagued federal agencies, exposing every problem or mistake it can. The paper puts substantial effort into investigating reports of rogue vibrations near Metro stations, issues with radio reception in tunnels, and administrative issues at the WMATA inspector general’s office. Every broken air conditioner, carpet contract, and crime statistic fluctuation is covered in great detail.  

Occasionally, the paper takes things a step farther, publishing pieces implying that rail systems in auto-dominated metro areas such as Dallas and Atlanta are preferable to DC’s Metro. Other articles have implied that high-capacity transit routes are becoming outdated in a world of microtransit and app-based ride hailing. Such articles present the challenges WMATA faces not as fixable problems that threaten quality of life in the region, but instead as evidence supporting the perspective of venture capital-funded tech companies whose goals may not align with residents’ desire to get where they need to go.

The Times: A newspaper lays out the potential economic ramifications of a transit crisis

In contrast to DC’s culture of politics, which emphasizes networking and proving oneself to others, societal status in New York – a center of global finance – is largely determined by money. 

So, instead of striving to uncover scandal after scandal, Times journalists analyze New York MTA’s challenges through an economic lens, focusing on the system’s end product. They report on the wide-reaching impacts of unreliable transit service (such as effects on individuals’ earnings), describe the multi-faceted causes of the delays (particularly financial decisions politicians and officials have made), and explain the consequences the city could face if service continues to decline (for example, neighborhoods subway lines made prosperous could face substantial economic challenges).

In discussing MTA’s future, no Times article I have read has implied that recent trends such as app-based ride hailing and microtransit could replicate the combination of capacity, speed, and affordability reliable urban rail and bus service has offered for decades – in fact, the paper has highlighted the absurdity of this idea. Instead, articles illustrate MTA’s poor performance relative to other large transit systems and discuss potential solutions. The paper has described in detail why subway maintenance has lagged, explained why rail projects frequently suffer from bloated budgets, and thoughtfully analyzed funding mechanisms MTA could consider utilizing (such as value capture).

What can we learn from the Times?

First and foremost we should be proud that, in an era of alternative facts, both the Post and Times strive to report accurately and do not spin the news for sinister purposes.

But we should also be aware that the angle from which a media outlet chooses to cover a transit system can have unintended consequences. Based on the comment sections of articles I have read, most Times readers seem to come away with knowledge that transit is the nerve of any modern city’s economy, and that continued declines in system performance – a real possibility if corrective action is not taken soon – would cause substantial harm. Many Post readers, on the other hand, come away believing that WMATA – and, by extension, transit in the DC region – is too dysfunctional to repair.

While the Post’s approach is an effective method to hold corrupt politicians accountable, treating the area’s largest transit agency as a public enemy is much riskier. If an elected official is forced out of office, someone new (and ideally, more effective) will rise and take their place. But if a regional transit provider implodes, the traveling public will be left stranded and life will grind to a halt.

Thus, for the good of the city I live in, I hope Post reporters learn from the Times's excellent subway coverage and develop a more constructive approach, rather than continuing to search for flaws and negativity.

New Urbanist Memes for Transit-Oriented...Bureaucrats?

Millennials trying to fix transportation become mired in the same red tape transit agencies struggle with

Dorasan Station: Not the last station from the South, but the last station NUMTOTs are allowed to discuss on Facebook (Photo courtesy of My Travel Journal-Blog) 

The New Urbanist Memes for Transit-Oriented Teens (NUMTOT) Facebook group has received excellent publicity recently, including profiles in The Guardian and CityLab. Thrilled to learn that so many others around the world share my passion for multimodal transportation, striving for the same vision of people-oriented "peak transit," I was one of the thousands of excited advocates who joined the group in the wake of this publicity. Since then, I've been entertained daily by the transit-related stories, pictures, and memes that have come to dominate my news feed.

I'd been hesitant to post any of my own transportation writing (either for this blog or Mobility Lab) to the NUMTOT group. Given the role social media has played in dividing our country, I did not want to risk becoming trapped in an "echo chamber" that would incentivize me to unleash my most radical side and forget that good transportation systems must effectively move everyone – not just urbanists like me.

But a couple weeks ago, I wrote a Mobility Lab article that I thought would be a perfect fit for the group and its members. The article, which laid out how a reformed, opened North Korea could essentially skip the automobile age, posited (through the lens of well-known current events) that, with proper planning and support, obstacles to better multimodal transportation can be overcome. In essence, my goal was to show that "peak transit" is a truly achievable goal, rather than just something to dream about in cyberspace. 

Thus, I decided to make the North Korea piece the subject of my NUMTOT debut, submitting the post as soon as I got home from work on the day the article ran.

But a few hours later, I noticed that the post had yet to go live. Out of curiosity, I decided to take a look at the rules governing NUMTOT, which group admin Juliet Eldred had recently re-posted for all the new members. As I expected, my post – which was original, unique, and urbanism-focused – met the group's basic standards. 

However, a small bit of wording situated near the end of Ground Rule #6 caught my eye. Specifically, Eldred wrote, "[NUMTOT] is not the group to debate the merits of broad economic systems, litigate the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, or defend North Korea."

I still figured my post would be fine, given that the article certainly does not defend Kim Jong-un's regime. The ground rules also implied that due to the group's large size, it can take some time for moderators to approve posts, so I expected it to be live no more than a day or two later.

***

The post never made it through moderation. My editor at Mobility Lab, Jenna Fortunati, also attempted to post the article in the NUMTOT group, without any luck. 

This decision seems to have been made by an overwhelmed moderator, who probably rejected the article as soon as they saw the words "North Korea" and didn't bother reviewing the actual content of the post. Who knows, perhaps they were jaded following the efforts of the regime's troll army to spread pro-Kim propaganda online. 

As could be expected, I was quite disappointed, especially since Eldred's ground rules also don't permit members to inquire regarding reasons posts were rejected, or even regarding a pending post's status. I wondered whether the powerful Washington Post article on Palestinians' cross-border commutes into Israel (a must-read for anyone interested in transportation) also had been NUMTOT-banned, as well as whether the group would have permitted discussion of Rosa Parks and the Montgomery Bus Boycott had Facebook existed in the 1950s.  

But the more I've thought about this snafu, I've come to realize that the NUMTOT moderator's error reflects the same challenges U.S. transit agencies face in their efforts to improve their systems and provide good customer service. With insufficient resources to account for every important operational detail, oppressive red tape and harmful bureaucratic oversights are inevitable. Some notable results:

• The inability of large American rapid transit systems, like the New York Subway and DC Metro, to both provide good service seven days per week and complete all necessary maintenance (as large systems abroad do)
• The high costs of transit infrastructure improvements, which dwarf those of comparable projects in other countries and appear, at least in part, to be related to bureaucratic inefficiency 
• A lack of big-picture thinking, as the continued closure of the new Point Definance Bypass rail line in Washington state demonstrates (imagine the public fury that would result if a major freeway remained closed for six months after a car crash)   

My inability to even obtain an explanation from the NUMTOT admins regarding my post's deletion also echoes transit providers' often-poor customer service. Though unexpected issues inevitably affect transit service sometimes, riders should be able to obtain an accurate, complete explanation when things go wrong. When people are left in the dark, the odds increase that they'll give up on transit altogether, leading to reduced revenue for the system and a lower quality of life for everyone.

Going forward, the role of social media-based discussion groups like NUMTOT will only become more prominent. Thus, leaders of such groups should be seeking solutions to transit's bureaucratic problems, rather than perpetuating them. The work needed to discover and implement these solutions won't be easy and will likely involve tense, uncomfortable discourse at times. Conducting case-by-case reviews of members' posts, rather than just implementing blanket bans on anything related to hot-button topics such as North Korea, would be a strong start to this effort.  

***

As soon as this blog post is live, I'm going to try re-posting my North Korea article in the NUMTOT group. Hopefully this time, the results will be more fruitful. 

   

         

In a DC neighborhood with lots of multimodal options, residents are fixated on parking

Sam's Park & Shop fails to take advantage of the Cleveland
Park Metro station (photo courtesy of Otavio) 

The November 14, 2017 Cleveland Park Citizens’ Association meeting had been a friendly environment, a chance to become more educated about my neighbors’ concerns. I was inspired by citizens’ efforts to bring business to neighborhood establishments, learned about planned projects intended to ensure runoff from future storms does not flood our Metro station, and listened to a resident plead her case that the powers that be should move the local farmers’ market from Saturdays to Sundays. All in all, everyone present at Adas Israel seemed outgoing and in a good mood, hoping to contribute positively to their community.

Then, parking advocates took over

Discussion pertaining to the neighborhood’s parking situation begins approximately 1 hour and 26 minutes into the meeting video linked to in the first sentence of this article.

It started with a quick reference to the sentiments of some local business owners, who sincerely believe that construction of new parking spots in the neighborhood would attract more customers. But within minutes a man sitting by the aisle had stated that the elderly owner of a small parking lot behind the post office should sell the lot to someone willing to add 30 more spots because he is “ready to die”. Automobiles already cause over 35,000 needless U.S. deaths each year, so what’s one more sacrifice?

The parking advocates’ demands piled on. Cleveland Park’s Metro station has “done great harm to us”, one male advocate argued, because “it has stolen at least a dozen [parking] spaces with those air grates” supplying the oxygen the 4,000 riders boarding trains there each day breathe. Those businesses that supposedly would benefit from more parking? Under unrelenting pressure from the advocates, Ward 3 Councilmember Mary Cheh said she has considered asking those businesses to pick up and move “out to the street,” enduring major disruption so we can “use the space behind to put up some kind of a parking garage.”

When the subject finally changed, one advocate fumed in her seat, the moderator having cut off her question-turned-rant to Councilmember Cheh.

We do a lot to make drivers and parkers happy

Though the 2013 Cleveland Park Transportation Study shows that walking and transit are the predominant modes of transportation for trips to neighborhood retailers, much of Cleveland Park’s planning revolves around parking. For example, the Metro station entrance on Connecticut Avenue’s east side is bordered not by transit-oriented mixed-use development that fully captures the economic benefits the infrastructure could provide the neighborhood, but instead by a strip mall with chain stores and readily available parking that could fool someone into thinking they’re in Woodbridge, along with an Exxon-Mobil gas station at which the parkers patronizing the strip mall can refill their tanks.

Parking in Cleveland Park is so abundant that, according to ANC 3C04 Beau Finley, some healthy neighborhood residents drive to Walgreens to avoid a five minute walk. A planned project to improve the neighborhood’s streetscape and drainage will not touch the 22 parking spots in the service lane paralleling Connecticut. The plan currently includes an option for new Capital Bikeshare docks at Connecticut and Porter, but Finley expressed skepticism as to whether the docks will survive inevitable changes to the plan.

And that strip mall next to the Metro entrance? It has been deemed historically significant, a pioneering example of strip mall architecture, preventing the property’s owners from constructing more profitable and customer-friendly transit oriented development. Thus, we are stuck with a Metro-adjacent parking lot complete with numerous empty spots, even if autonomous vehicle technology renders car parking obsolete.       

Extreme auto-centricity is not unique to Cleveland Park

It’s clear that currently, drivers have substantially more influence over DC-area transportation policy than transit riders, cyclists, and pedestrians do. Parking spots take priority over protected bike lanes and Metro station improvements. Scores of streetcar passengers on H Street frequently must wait for individuals who view the tracks as their own personal parking lot. 

Drivers have used cars to deliberately mow down innocent civilians in New York, Charlottesville, and several overseas cities. However, Vice President Mike Pence welcomed valet parkers with open arms to celebrate the passage of last year’s House Tax Bill at the National Building Museum, oblivious to the security threat their cars posed. Red Line riders wishing to use Judiciary Square Station, on the other hand, were told to take a hike to Chinatown in the name of security.

The day after the vice president’s speech, I headed over to Granville Moore’s (on H Street) to have a beer. I inadvertently sat next to patrons who were discussing their hatred toward those of us who choose to use non-car modes. Specifically, they feel cyclists doored by drivers are to blame for the crashes.

“We have to open our doors,” they exclaimed, while laughing and drinking.

I guess they don’t find it necessary to make sure they open their doors safely. These parkers adamantly expressed their hope that doored cyclists flip over and fall, as any cyclist who manages to stay upright in the face of driver inattention fails to entertain them sufficiently.  

In the end, we will overcome parking advocates

It is highly unlikely parking advocates and their elected allies will actually manage to turn their wishes, such as expensive modifications to the Cleveland Park Metro grates, construction of a multistory parking garage in the neighborhood, or free-for-all bicycle dooring, into reality.

However, they succeed by changing the debate. Largely due to their advocacy, infrastructure improvements that should be no-brainers (such as the Purple Line or new protected bike lanes) become hard-fought debates, while initiatives that should be subject to serious cost-benefit analysis (such as construction of an extensive dedicated bus lane network in DC or a second Rosslyn rail tunnel) have little hope of seeing the light of day in the near future.

Thus, citizens simply wishing for an easy way to get to their destinations are out of luck, and instead are forced to use their hard-earned incomes to sustain reliable revenue streams for auto dealers, gas stations, and ride hailing companies.

But though parking advocates may delay progress, in the end our transportation system will improve in spite of their efforts. Eventually, urban mobility will consist of networks of high-capacity, efficient trunk transit lines supplemented by shared autonomous vehicles and extensive active transportation infrastructure, allowing municipalities and businesses to reclaim parking lots.

Even as we await such innovation, many citizens have expressed a desire to improve the communities they live in. At the same Cleveland Park Citizens’ Association meeting parkers attempted to commandeer, resident George Idelson spoke up for multimodal improvements, recommending the city extend the DC Circulator route that currently terminates in Woodley Park to our neighborhood.

In response, Councilmember Cheh explained that she is working to extend the Circulator route up Connecticut to the National Zoo. As for further extension to Cleveland Park’s business corridor and beyond, the fight has yet to begin.