For DC, a congestion charge is not the way to go
WAMU-FM/NPR reports that DC City Council has allocated money to study the imposition of a congestion charge ("Should D.C. Toll Streets During Peak Traffic Periods? Council Wants To Study ‘Congestion Pricing’").
Congestion charges have two different purposes.
(1) reduce traffic by inducing people to shift trips to other modes or to not make trips altogether. (And by reducing traffic, they help to speed up the remaining traffic, including surface bus transit.)
This is done through the classic recommendations of instituting a "tax" where spillover costs are not normally captured within pricing.
(2) provide an additional source of funding for transportation projects, ideally prioritizing sustainable mobility initiatives.
First, much of the metropolitan area's "worst" congestion is in the suburbs, and is on highways, not in DC proper, although getting to and from DC is one of the contributing factors.
-- "3 DC-area roads make list of America's 50 worst traffic bottlenecks," Fox5
Most studies that rank "DC" bad for traffic call the entire metropolitan area after the center city. The fact is that DC does have a problem with congestion on certain streets in the core (K Street, I Street primarily) the reality is that most of the streets in the core aren't that congested.
Transit--Metrorail primarily despite its current problems--works!
Washington Capitals fans exiting the Metrorail system. One great thing about having the city's main arena in the core, served by 3 subway lines directly, and just a few blocks from 3 more lines, is how even a preponderance of suburbanites take transit to events held there.
I make this statement by the fact that during rush hour, it's possible to run red lights on a bicycle without any fear of oncoming traffic.
The major exception is the main commuter arteries such as 16th Street, Blair Road, Rhode Island Avenue, New York Avenue (itself congested because of the way it connects I-95 and I-695 for through trips to Virginia and Maryland). Although, some of this traffic would be interdicted I supposed by people switching to other modes in response to a congestion charge in Downtown.
Second, and most importantly, for DC to successfully levy a congestion charge, it has to be inalterably the #1 destination in the region for commerce subject to minimal competition for business relocation.
That's the case in cities like Singapore, Stockholm, or London, which have already instituted congestion charges, or New York City for Lower Manhattan, which has agreed to include a congestion charge going forward--not because they care that much about congestion, but because they need a funding source for rehabilitating the New York City Subway system.
I don't think it's the case for DC. Especially with the current federal administration and its willingness to eliminate agencies altogether or move them outside of DC and the DC metropolitan area.
My paralyzing fear is that Maryland and Virginia would actively market business relocation against DC, making the point that you can get to their business districts without having to pay a congestion charge.
I don't think either state or its jurisdictions can really be trusted on this.
In fact, when I saw a presentation by the then planning director of Arlington County at the National Building Museum in 2002, I went up to him afterwards and suggested he retitle his presentation "how to kill DC." That continues to be the case, given how Crystal City has just landed Amazon as a major tenant and Rosslyn has been landing corporate headquarters such as Nestle Foods.
Granted, you can argue that high occupancy tolls are a form of congestion charge. But some argue that the reason that Virginia made I-66 within the Beltway a toll road is to encourage businesses to relocate to Virginia from DC, thereby being able to get to and from a new location without tolls.
Alternative one: transit withholding tax. If the point of doing a congestion charge is raising funds, what I have recommended for years, but the federal government would have to agree, and it would be helpful for the suburbs to agree too, would be a transportation withholding tax.
It's done in France--providing a majority of the operating funding for transit service (France has successful light rail systems in many of its regional cities, not just in Paris), as well as certain areas of Oregon (Portland, Eugene), and for the MTA system in New York State (although I argue there it is too gross-grained, out-state residents served by railroads should pay less than core residents served by the subway--instead the same rate is assessed across the board).
-- "Commuter/mobility tax discussion for DC," 2012
-- "Metrolinx Toronto: 25 potential tools to fund transit-transportation infrastructure," 2013
Alternative two: commuter tunnel and transitway network. If the point of a congestion charge is interdicting nasty traffic, in addition to investing in more and better transit, I have argued for the creation of some roadway tunnels on commuter arteries, e.g., North Capitol-Blair Road, to shift commuter traffic away from surface streets, because it has deleterious impact on the quality of neighborhood life.
These would be covered by tolls, not unlike HOT lanes. Maybe they wouldn't fully pay their way, but by shifting through traffic away from neighborhoods, it could be a cost worth subsidizing.
The Southeast-Southwest Freeway (I-695) in DC looking west from 4th Street SW.
-- "Dedicated bus lanes coming to H and I streets this summer," Washington Post
-- "It's been a drawn out process, but DC is in the process of creating transitways on 16th Street NW," 2017
This program could also include some road decking, such as on North Capitol Street and the Southeast-Southwest Freeway.
-- "Tunnelized road projects for DC and the Carmel Tunnel, Haifa, Israel example--tolls," 2011
-- "London Mayor proposes roadway tunnels to divert surface motor vehicle traffic and congestion" 2016
-- "Maryland HOT lane study versus "corridor management" and regional scaled transportation planning," 2018
-- "Who knew? There's been a freeway deck in Oak Park, Michigan over I-696 for almost 30 years," 2018
I haven't written about it, but tunnelizing DC-295/The Anacostia Freeway, would be a boon to the quality of life and economic potential of a large section of the city East of the River.
This video by Bossi of DC 295 has unrelated sound. I'd turn it off before listening, unless you want to listen to an old Diane Rehm radio broadcast.
If we had true metropolitan transportation planning, the Maryland HOT lane study could be coordinated with a DC tunnel/decking study. For example commuter tunnels on 16th Street and Georgia Avenue would make sense to be integrated into the Maryland system.
-- "Here's a look at who's using Northern Virginia's 495 and 95 Express Lanes," Washington Post, 2018
-- "Poll: 61 percent of D.C.-area residents favor plan to add toll lanes to Beltway, I-270," Washington Post
Labels: congestion charge, congestion mitigation, freeways, infrastructure, public finance and spending, tolls, transportation planning, urban design/placemaking
posted by Richard Layman @ 9:47 AM&Permanent Link
4 Comments:
the congestion charge issue easily gets turned into a statehood issue; it would be possible to charge every vehicle coming INTO the district in lieu of a commuter tax.
In fact it makes a certain amount of sense to push for that in the hope of weakening the commuter tax ban.
But to go back to tax policy, using taxes and fees for social engineering is going to end badly.
But yes to the major point -- with a few exceptions DC doesn't have bad traffic. Smaller scale solutions work as well. If you remember when Fox news pushed for barriers coming off the whitehurst on to M st -- that worked very well for a while. Dedicated traffic cameras to catch violators (block the box etc) and keep traffic moving. Hell, even the much derided traffic wardens on some streets downtown.
(K st downtown, for instance, is about 45% blocked by buses during rush hour). there was an attempt on rationalizing stop placement which helped but it needs to be a process not a one time event.
Also DC has gotten very negligent on towing rush hour parked cars.
Yep, I forgot the statehood issue, which reminds of then Council Chairman Kwame Brown's proposal (I think it was his) to toll the bridges like 14th St. Bridge and freeways like DC-295.
But I just think that the unintended consequence of pushing economic activity out of the city is too risky.
2. not sure I agree totally on social engineering. E.g., a congestion charge works better than using odd/even plate numbers. People get around the latter by buying another car...
The big issue is as you always say, the lack of charging for the externalities.
This does it.
It's just that the externalities and traffic, for the most part, are worse in the suburbs. And because they have a system that requires automobility all the time, that's why they have bad traffic on the weekends too, "outside of rush hour." When everyone drives to accomplish everything they want to do outside of the house, they're stuck...
3. wrt "the little things," we have discussed that in the past. One of the ironic outcomes of HOT lanes -- "managed lanes" -- is that they are managed to promote throughput, and that means quickly removing accidents, etc. The 495 people (Transurban) recognized they'd have to clear problems in the adjoining "non-managed lanes" because of the spillover effect onto their system.
I know that DC has traffic operations vehicles that are supposed to do some of this. Plus your traffic wardens, etc. But evidently they aren't being utilized all that effectively.
Plus the added issue of now when there is any sort of "emergency situation", "for safety reasons" they shut down all the roads around the area. In the past, they'd still allow through traffic, albeit with officers doing traffic control.
AND SO MUCH ERSATZ DOUBLE PARKING. Quick towing and massive tickets would be a great behavior modification tool.
And some areas, you need to remove parking. The SG people would say that encourages driving, but in certain places it's necessary, like what they finally did on Georgia Avenue southbound at U Street, where the parking + the left turn lane created massive queues. Now that isn't a problem, since a few parking spaces were removed.
There are other places deserving of a similar treatment. I recommended it for a couple of stretches in the planning process for our area transportation plan, although I doubt they'll take them up.
(In my comments, I came up with the "missing protocol" for how to best provide and compile responses.
By mode/infrastructure type, etc., e.g., sidewalks, transit station, bus routes, neighborhood streets, arterials, etc., and macro (big picture) and micro (this intersection needs a stop sign).
The way this stuff gets mapped in public planning processes is cacophonous. It's not done in layers, and it just puts push pins for everything everywhere.)
https://www.brookings.edu/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/20090406_jobsprawl_kneebone.pdf
Yes, DC is an outlier. Because of the federal "requirement" to keep a certain percentage of agencies based in DC.
Although they are chipping away at this, and by underfunding investment in buildings and other infrastructure, this is less valuable.
And like for your moving to DC to reduce transportation to work issues, a lot of law firms and associations stay in the core too, because of proximity.
BUT, Rosslyn and Crystal City are alternatives. Plus, a lot of organizations need to be close, but not every day close, so places like Alexandria or Bethesda are fine alternatives.
And plenty of organizations focused on the Dept. of Defense locate in Virginia, based on proximity, etc.
But that report is old in that (1) businesses are shedding workers; (2) businesses are reducing the amount of space/worker; (3) businesses continue to rightsize the location of particular functions, moving "back office" functions to lower cost areas; (4) but there is some refocusing if not on relocating to the center city; (5) relocating to central suburban locations, like Reston, Rockville Town Center, Tysons, etc., away from disconnected office park locations.
====
I was intrigued that some foreign insurance company paid good money for some Fair Lakes buildings, it was positioned as "because of Amazon" even though HQ2 is 21 miles away, while Douglas Development bought a foreclosed office park building out there for $8.5MM, a building that had been vacant for 10 years.
Post a Comment
<< Home