The Trump Administration and Stone Age Thinking | Announces bike lanes are "woke" (and hasn't been funding transit infrastructure projects)

It goes without saying that to most people in the United States "Fuel" = Gasoline.  

General Curtis LeMay is famous for saying the US would "bomb Vietnam back to the Stone Age" in the quest to "win" the Vietnam War.

The Trump Administration is reducing American resilience in many ways:

• Denying climate change
• Defunding science and medical research, especially at universities--programs are being cut, people are being laid off, and acceptance of new graduate students and postgraduate fellows are on the wane
• But also in various government programs, including the Park Service, the Forest Service, the National Science Foundation, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, and dismantling the National Center for Atmospheric Research because it focuses on climate change("What the US Would Lose If It Eliminates the National Center for Atmospheric Research," Inside Climate News)
• Promoting anti-vaccine beliefs and easing vaccine requirements and guidance, thereby increasing people's susceptibility to diseases that once were rare, like measles
• Ceasing health surveillance programs such as for germ-free produce, which likely has contributed to the current mass problem of cyclosporidia ("How Trump admin cuts have compromised food safety," CBS)
• Paying wind turbine companies to not build sustainable energy projects ("Here’s where Trump has canceled wind farms – and how states are pushing back," Christian Science Monitor)
• Deemphasizing support for electric vehicles, which helps to reduce the demand and dependence on fossil fuels, and puts the US automobile industry behind in the development of new technologies and their ability to compete with EV-focused companies especially from China ("Trump’s Isolationism Is Losing the Great E.V. Races," New Yorker, "The American E.V. Has Been Crushed. Will It Take the U.S. Auto Industry With It?," New York Times)
• Although the foolish/fuelish War with Iran has led to major rise in gasoline prices and a disruption in production and supply chains that will take years to unravel and this is encouraging the adoption of electric vehicles despite the lack of tax credits and other inducements ("California hopes to lure a new generation to electric cars, with help from rebates, high gas prices," Los Angeles Times)

Source: "Explainer: In gasoline-guzzling U.S., high pump prices can be political poison," Reuters.

• Firing competent military officials in favor of Christian Nationalists, and boosting them with testosterone, instead of focusing on how drones are completely changing the military "battlespace"
• Eliminating graduate military education programs at "woke universities" like Harvard, which means that military personnel are less well educated and innovative
• etc.

This to me, is a form of bombing the US back to the Stone Age.  Related is what historian Timothy Snyder calls the Trump Administration's actions as a form of "Superpower Suicide" where the country through its actions is reducing its power and relevance on the world stage.

A new car showroom.  The US automobile industry spends more than $12 billion per year on advertising and marketing, from manufacturing companies to dealerships to ancillary organizations financing cars, selling car warranties, etc.

To the Trump Administration, energy is derived only from oil (and coal and nuclear).  Not from solar, wind, or geothermal sources.  From the Politico article "The Trump administration wants more gasoline made in idled refineries from California to sunny St. Croix":

Three industry executives told the news outlet that the White House has had discussions about reopening refineries ranging from the Virgin Islands to California. “Energy security is national security, and America’s refining capacity is essential to ensuring the United States has continuous access to secure, affordable, and reliable energy,” White House spokesperson Taylor Rogers said in a statement.

“The President’s National Energy Dominance Council will continue supporting the reopening of shuttered refineries and the construction of new ones to lower prices and strengthen our national security,” Rogers added.

In the meantime, truly advanced nations are building their resilience, which among other actions means a big shift away from fossil fuels.  In fact, China's ability to reduce their consumption has reduced what are the already high costs for gasoline as a result of the Iran War ("China's oil imports have plunged during the Iran war. How much will they recover?," Reuters).

Sustainable mobility as a financial and health resilience strategy and tactic.  You might not think so, but every transit user, bicyclist choosing biking over driving for trips, and pedestrians walking instead of driving, reduces the demand for automobiles and gasoline, and increases their household resilience by reducing dependence on expensive cars and gas--a new car now costs not quite $12,000 per year according to NerdWallet.

This in turn reduces the demand for gasoline, which when your President has already f* up availability and cost, helps the nation in times of strife.

E.g., wrt biking and not owning a car, that supported $100,000 of our mortgage in DC.  It also reduced other costs and saved time for me.  Plus, there were major health benefits--granted I chose to bike in 1990 because I knew there were health benefits and I had a paternal line history of heart disease, but my cardiologists and oncologists attribute my survival from heart disease and two cancers in part to 30 years of biking.  So far I've outlived my father and other relatives by at least 12 years.

Suzanne doesn't bike.  But she used transit (aided by the federal transit benefit, which is a big help).

Hill Family Biking is a community group in DC's Capitol Hill, promoting biking over driving, especially in getting kids to and from school.  This event had 450 cyclists of all ages.

Trump Administration Hostile to Transit.  So in terms of "Stone Age Thinking" it makes perfect sense that the US Department of Transportation, which is already defunding transit by not acting on applications ("Congress Budgeted Billions for Big Transit Projects. Trump Isn’t Spending It," New York Times),

Trump Administration is now expressly hostile to Biking/Biking isn't hostile to cars.  The Administration has recently made clear its belief that bike lanes are "woke" pro-diversity/equity/inclusion initiatives that are antithetical to a dependence on automobiles and gasoline ("Trump Cancels Trail, Bike-Lane Grants Deemed ‘Hostile’ to Cars," Bloomberg).  Relatedly, the Trump Administration refused to sign on to a UN Declaration on the importance of road safety ("The U.S. Alone Votes Against A Road Safety Declaration," Forbes).

From Bloomberg:

The Trump administration canceled grants for street safety measures, pedestrian trails and bike lanes in communities around the country this month, each time offering a simple rationale for yanking back federal aid: the projects aren’t designed for cars.

A San Diego County road improvement project including bike lanes “appears to reduce lane capacity and a road diet that is hostile to motor vehicles,” a US Department of Transportation official wrote, rescinding a $1.2 million grant it awarded nearly a year ago.

... the wave of cancellations issued Sept. 9 by the DOT demonstrates just how determined the administration is to promote the use of single-occupancy vehicles in cities and towns – and to thwart local governments’ attempts to develop other ways for residents to get around.

Hostile to cars?  Heterogeneous versus homogeneous mobility systems. What a joke.  This fits in with my point that while countries like Germany are fine with a heterogeneous approach to mobility--they are big on cars with big manufacturers like VW, Mercedes, and BMW, but at the same time they recognize transit is the best way to get around in cities, that traveling by train between cities is often more efficient and less environmentally costly than flying, and that biking is a good way to reduce demand for gasoline, parking spaces, space on the road, etc.

By contrast, the US forces as much as possible, policies to promote automobile and gasoline dependence, in part because the US is one of the largest producers of oil.  Germany is a big producer of automobiles, like the US, but they aren't much of an oil producer.  So they take a more balanced approach.

The US could hold up cities like NYC as a premier transit example, and Portland Oregon as a premier city for biking (there are many other best practice neighborhoods), and neighborhoods across the country as premier walking places, and accept a multi-modal mobility system, but instead it takes the one sided view and favors cars.

Even EVs, while better in terms of reduced fossil fuel demand, especially with the rise of sustainable energy generation complemented by batteries, are really just another form of automobile primacy--what I call "Next Generation Asphalt Nation."

The True Snowflakes are the Right.  The right has called the left "snowflakes" for promoting bike lanes, LGBTQ+ issues and the like.  But the right in shutting down all kinds of programs that challenge their narrow minded world view of what is "muscular" are the true snowflakes.

=====

Bike sharing/micromobility.  It's taken more than a decade but city bike sharing systems in places like NYC and DC have experienced a huge increase in take up over the past few years ("Citi Bike surge: Ridership increases, showing ‘critical’ need in NYC transit deserts, says advocacy group," amNY, "Bikeshare Beat: Capital Bikeshare breaks all-time annual ridership record," GGW).  

One factor has been expansion.  The other, increased deployment of electric bikes which are faster, easier to ride, and cover more distance more quickly compared to regular bikes.  

Plus, in cities bike sharing has the advantage of offloading parking/storage and security to a third party.

A person rides on an electric scooter on Congress Avenue in downtown Austin on Tuesday July 7th, 2026.  Photo: Mikala Compton/Austin American-Statesman.

Separately, "free range" bike and scooter sharing offered up by companies like Lime, Spin, and now Veo--sitting scooters further expand the willingness of people to use "micromobility devices" as primary forms of transportation ("What to know about the new rental scooters now on Salt Lake City streets," Salt Lake Tribune). 

These companies also provide coverage in cities without city-sanctioned dock based systems ("Austin riders turn to Lime, Bird scooters after CapMetro Bikeshare suspension," Austin American-Statesman).  

I hadn't thought about SNAP cuts significantly impacting inner city groceries

This article is inspired in part by the Washington City Paper article, "Oh, SNAP: How Program Cuts Are Impacting Food Access in the DMV." From the article:

“The number of people receiving SNAP has fallen in D.C., Maryland, and Virginia,” says Katie Bergh, senior policy analyst at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, which tracks the impact SNAP cuts are having. Bergh, citing USDA data, tells City Paper that the number of people receiving SNAP in D.C. dropped by almost 7,500 between the law’s July 2025 enactment and March—a roughly 6 percent decrease.

Numbers are steeper in our neighboring states: “In Maryland, state data show the number of people receiving SNAP fell by more than 39,000 people between July 2025 and April 2026,” also about a 6 percent drop, says Bergh. “More than 17,000 were children.” Virginia has seen the worst with a roughly 13 percent decrease—that’s 111,000 people who are no longer receiving benefits—between July 2025 and May 2026. The federal government is also shifting a higher cost burden to states, which is making it harder for states—and D.C.—to balance their budgets.

It's always a struggle to have supermarkets, either full line or with a smaller set of items, operating in inner city neighborhoods.  

The costs are higher, including employee retention and losses due to stealing and fraud.  

Places without stores are called food deserts or food insecure places.  But this is deceiving because since people have to eat, they come up with ways to get to grocery stores, even if they have to go out of their neighborhood to do so.  

But this is something I noticed living in the H Street NE neighborhood back in the 1980s and 1990s.  People had ways to buy groceries.  Even though an independent opened in the neighborhood called MegaFoods, many didn't think it served them well enough, so they either protested, or continued to shop outside of the neighborhood.

Of course, many people use transit to grocery shop.  I hated using the bus for groceries.  Mind the subway less.  But mostly shopped by bike, putting the bags on my handlebars, and using my backpack--sadly it took me 20 years to figure out I could put my backpack on the handlebars too--imagine riding uphill from Capitol Hill to Manor Park with a watermelon in your backpack, not fun.

(Separately, the Chronicle of Philanthropy has an article on DC Central Kitchen, which is a social enterprise that in part addresses food access issues: "How DC Central Kitchen Keeps Expanding While Other Nonprofits Shrink")

Also see:

-- "Grocery stores in cities: the failure of the "15 minute grocery store"" (2023)

=======

Gross profit margins on groceries are minimal.  As it is, the average grocery store only makes 1.5% that is a penny and a haf per dollar of sales.  That doesn't leave a lot of room for error, or provide the ability to react when there are scalar changes in economic conditions.  Tariffs are making it worse.  Same with increased transportation costs because of the Trump Iran War.

This is why supermarkets would rather donate food to events and organizations and not money (I tried to get the grocery store cooperative in Salt Lake to fund grills at Sugar House Park and they said they had no money to give.).

Chicago: Yellow Banana's Sav-A-Lot stores on the brink of closure.  Yellow Banana is a grocery "start up" from a few years back that bought a bunch of Sav A Lot stores--a discount low number of items store operating primarily in low income areas.  Sav A Lot is a chain that has company stores and franchised stores.  

SAL was owned by Supervalu which sold it off to private equity before being acquired by UNFI.  The current owner is trying to sell off the stores, and function as a wholesaler/franchisor.  That's how YB got the stores they operate.

YB has/had seven stores in Chicago.  And they received money from the city to do so.  They had a lot of problems getting going, and the stores have to be operated for 10 years for the company to get the full amount awarded.

In the last year, the company's president died unexpectedly of a stroke, without anyone to replace him, and the "One Big Beautiful Bill" cut funding for the federal Supplementary Nutrition Assistance Program, which provides a modicum of money to poor people to buy food--the amount provided is paltry, it's a crime.  Most people getting benefits get less than $200/month.

Customers shop at Save A Lot’s remodeled West 63rd Street store in West Lawn on April 9, 2025. (Eileen T. Meslar/Chicago Tribune)

According to the Supermarket News article "Yellow Banana ready to close 7 Chicago stores, loses tie with Save A Lot":

SNAP money at the six stores accounted for almost 50% of revenue, and SNAP sales have declined about 27% year over year.

Projections at the start of the year showed the stores were getting close to breaking even but would still lose in the range of $500,000, a figure the source said was not insurmountable. Then the SNAP cuts kicked in.

SAL, which had been providing the company with inventory on credit, pulled the rug and cancelled the franchise agreement.  

The company has been crushed by the loss of SNAP-related sales.

It's not news that the Trump bill has had a lot of negative effects, including one they think is positive, which is reducing the tax rate on rich people and corporations.

Sadly, this is not an unintended consequence.  It was intended.  And this is but one of the many fallouts from the Act.

(There used to be a SAL on Chillum Road in nearby Maryland, and on occasion I would bike there to buy groceries.  It's long since closed although they still have other stores in Prince George's County.  When you're buying shortening, why pay a lot more for it at a mainline grocery when you can get it at a store like SAL or Aldi?)

Also see:

-- "Save A Lot grocery stores could shutter abruptly this week," Chicago Tribune
-- "Save A Lot grocery operator gets an extension on City Hall-funded deal amid missed deadlines, lawsuits," Chicago Sun-Times

=====

Thoughts.  The margin issue is real.  That, plus lack of management expertise is why government owned groceries aren't likely to be successful.  And the least bit of problem in getting the store up and running and then operating--such as community opposition for any reason--makes it that much harder to succeed.

Recently, a more upscale grocer in Cleveland, Heinen's, closed its downtown store.  They said they lost $18 million over 11 years ("Heinen’s Cleveland location was losing millions," Supermarket News). And they sold alcohol too, which has higher margins.

Grocers in hard pressed areas probably need more subsidy than people realize, considering that 1.5% margin.  I know a cooperative in Connecticut had to close because they foolishly signed a lease requiring a percentage of gross revenue be paid to the property owner, even though $1 of additional revenue yields only 1.5 cents.

One such subsidy, and I'd have been against it before, is probably, "zero property tax" until the store shows a profit.

Streetcars: transit, economic development levers, source for discontent in local politics | Milwaukee HOP streetcar

There is a thread on Reddit criticizing plans for expansion of the Oklahoma Streetcar among other elements of the 2025 LONG RANGE TRANSIT PLAN for Central Oklahoma.  

I shook my head because most of the discussion relating to these projects complains, not unjustifiably, that the service is slow because it runs in mixed traffic.

(Interestingly, the city transit authority provides a free transit pass for people who park in city-owned parking garages.)

From the article, "Development, rather than ridership, a measure of success for Oklahoma City streetcar," Daily Oklahoman:

The Oklahoma City streetcar is one small part of a much larger plan, Scroggins said, that includes development, but also additional streetcar lines and other transit in OKC and the cities surrounding it. “The streetcar is a long-play investment," Scroggins said. "The day it was opening, Scissortail Park had just started construction. In 2020 and 2021 it was the (most used) stop.”

I make the distinction between intra-district transit and inter-district transit concerning modern streetcar projects such as Portland, Atlanta, Seattle, Cincinnati, Milwaukee, Tucson, Detroit, etc.  Speed isn't the foremost consideration for when you are moving about within a place/destination, versus getting to or from the destination.

Most people still don't see the distinction.

-- "Making the case for intra-city (vs. inter-city) transit planning," (2011)
-- "The argument that streetcars are "good enough" but "imperfect transit" is flawed," (2014)
-- "Modern streetcars are transportation projects,not merely economic development augurs: but intra-district not inter-city services," (2017)
-- "Brief follow up to intra-district transit proposal for Tysons: Toyama City Compact City initiative (Japan)," (2020)
-- "Revisiting: a proposal for heritage streetcar service on the National Mall | adding service to the DC waterfront," (2022, original 2013)
-- "Intra-neighborhood (tertiary) transit revisited because of new San Diego service," (2016)

Ten Principles for Successful Development Around Transit, Urban Land Institute.  Also see "The New Real Estate Mantra," APTA

And that looking at the speed of the trip ignores the economic development effects, which can be considerable. 

Based on my experience in DC, return on investment from transit projects done right is the fastest of various types of public investment.

For streetcars, Portland is the textbook example ("Portland streetcar: development oriented transit").  

Its original streetcar route spurred the creation of the Pearl District, with billions of dollars of development (more than $3 billion as of 2008), starting with an abandoned railyard, and provided better intra-city connections between Nob Hill, the Pearl District, Downtown, and Portland State University.

In turn the University has shifted even more towards an urban studies focus, welcoming the streetcar, financing at least one of the stops, and allowing the streetcar to travel on its campus.

As the system expands, it brings similar development energies to other areas of the city.

True, other streetcar lines haven't been nearly as successful, such as the SoDo streetcar in Seattle.  

Some has to do with the demographics of the area, like office worker heavy, or there just not being quite enough critical mass to fuel urban revitalization as a more self propelling phenomenon.  This can be accentuated by the lack of a streetcar network, or other modes of complementary rail transit.  

While it did complement massive economic development on the part of Paul Allen, the headquarters of Amazon, the fact is as a mostly business district, it didn't have much foot traffic--people are slaves to their desks, with little time to leave the office to eat or shop ("Seattle’s South Lake Union streetcar is an empty monument to money," Seattle Times).

Construction galore before the DC streetcar even opened.

DC's streetcar is the textbook example of poor planning, yet it has sparked more than $1 billion in new or planned development ("DC and streetcars #4: from the standpoint of stoking real estate development, the line is incredibly successful and it isn't even in service yet, and now that development is extending eastward past 15th Street," "Update/revision of H Street transit oriented real estate development table").  

Streetcars are an example of what economic development professionals call a priming device.

To me that's a success.  Even though there is an even more important planning lesson--if you build a short disconnected line rather than a streetcar network, it's not going to be very effective at transit.  That's the case with Seattle too.

Foolishly, DC is dumping the streetcar--it never committed to network creation--even though the streetcar serves the northern side of the campus for the new football team stadium ("Transformative $3.7 billion Commanders stadium deal passes D.C. Council," Washington Post). Very shortsighted.  You could pop a streetcar spur into the campus.

This model showed how North Potomac Yard might look redeveloped with 7.5 million square feet of new construction. The planned Metro station will connect to it.

On the other hand, in DC with the addition of infill Metrorail Stations at NoMA ("NoMA: the neighborhood transit built." Urban Land), and Potomac Yard in Alexandria ("Potomac Yard Metrorail Station Opening is Centerpiece of New Metropolitan D.C. Neighborhood," WSP, "Massive buildout proposal at Potomac Yard headed to Planning Commission," AXLNow), are a form of development-based transit that people don't criticize.  Granted such sites have the advantage of being inserted into an already successful subway network.

The first of what are proposed to be multiple streetcar lines serves Milwaukee's Downtown.

Milwaukee

After the Reddit thread, I happened to come across a couple articles about The HOP MKE streetcar in Milwaukee ("The Hop's 2018 launch was followed by several commercial developments near its route. Here's a list," "Does The Hop boost downtown Milwaukee property values to help fund city services? What to know," Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel), how after sponsorships and other funds, the city has to "subsidize" the service by $4 million per year.  

One Alderman thinks the money would be better spent on the impoverished.  From the second article:

The Hop is back in the news with Alderman Scott Spiker's call for shutting down the city-operated streetcar. Spiker says The Hop is costing Milwaukee taxpayers around $4 million annually. That could be better used to help pay for street repairs, libraries, public safety and other services, he says.

Streetcar at night outside the Milwaukee Public Market.

The Hop's defenders include Common Council members Robert Bauman and Peter Burgelis. They say its benefits include a boost for downtown property values − with that property tax revenue helping fund city services.

... Spiker says The Hop is an "albatross" around the city's neck and provides transportation "for the unhoused and well-heeled."  

Talk about a concern for equity.  Anyway, transportation demand management is a reason why many cities like Pittsburgh, Salt Lake, and Calgary, provide free transit within the Downtown core. 

While I understand the principles of equity planning as well as anyone, the fact is to fund social services you need positive tax revenue streams.  The Milwaukee streetcar has spurred close to $1 billion in development in the 7 years since the service started.

It's not easy to figure out the commercial property tax assessment in Milwaukee, but I calculate up to $37 million in new tax revenues annually from $1.7 billion in development.  I expect it's higher.  (I tried to contact the City Assessor office to figure this out, but they didn't return my calls.)

To me that is an easy calculation that it's worth it to "subsidize" the streetcar as it generates far more annual property tax revenue alone (+ sales + personal and corporate income taxes) than the cost of running the service.

I don't understand why such a basic calculation isn't top of mind for the streetcar haters.

New real estate development within a couple blocks of The Hop streetcar line in Downtown Milwaukee.  Some is new construction.  Some is the rehabilitation and adaptation of existing building stock. 

Building	Address	units/s.f.	Value*
Coutour** | residential/office	909 E. Michigan Street	322 | 42.6sf	$191MM
333 Water Street | residential	333 N. Water Street	333	$165MM
Ascent | residential	700 N. Kilbourne Avenue	259	$80MM
Nova Apartments	1237 N. Van Buren Street	251	$35MM
The Huron Building | office	511 N. Broadway	163,000 sf	$50MM
BMO Tower | office	1790 N. Water Street	383,000 sf	$137MM
Streetcar Flats | residential	828 N. Broadway	75	$12MM
Milwaukee Athletic Club | mixed + apts.	758 N. Broadway	54	$64MM
Drury Plaza Hotel	700 N. Water Place	227 rooms	$25MM
Kinn MKE Guesthouse | hotel	600 N. Broadway	32 rooms	$60MM
Central Distillery & Kitchen | restaurant	320 E. Clybourn Street		N/A
Hilton/Holiday Inn Hotels	515-525 N. Jefferson Street	331 rooms	$37MM***
321 Jefferson | residential	321 N. Jefferson Street	60	$15.6MM
TOTAL			$871.6MM

* = the value of the project is based on published figures and may not include certain development costs such as the cost of land

** the building has a ground flor streetcar and bus concourse 

*** estimate

______________________

While this quick table shows $871 million in new development, other sources quote double that amount (MKE Streetcar: Development and Investment Guide).

Sadly, expansion is being delayed because of the Trump Administration and funding strictures imposed by the Republican State Legislature ("Future of Milwaukee streetcar clouded by limited funding and operations challenges," Wisconsin Public Radio).

=====

Federal mass transit funding in the 1960s not enough, but could have been a model for creating streetcar networks in the 2000s.  

The Urban Mass Transportation Act of 1964 created a process that ended up creating the forerunner of the Federal Transit Administration.

It funded:

• some modern subway systems, Atlanta, Baltimore (late to the process, it only built one line), BART in SF, Miami, and Washington DC
• some light rail in Buffalo and Minneapolis
• a bunch of improvement projects at existing systems 
• People Mover projects in Detroit and Miami (" A Brief History of UMTA's Downtown People Mover Program")

As the willingness to deal with "the urban problem" waned ("The American Dream and the Urban Crisis," Black Perspectives), so did funding.

In my work in DC and Baltimore, I came to the realization that the biggest difference in transit impact between the two metropolitan areas is that DC has a six line subway network, while Baltimore has two disconnected lines, one subway, one light rail (+ the continued relevance of Downtown DC as an employment center).

Two cars of the 'people mover' public rail are seen covered with a advertisement for the 2014 Chevy Silverado pickup truck as they move past General Motors World Headquarters in Detroit, Michigan January 11, 2013. Reuters/Rebecca Cook

The network produces the most value.

It's unfortunate that the "industry," FTA etc., didn't see modern streetcars as an opportunity to provide a systems thinking/UMTA approach, and focused on funding streetcars as an urban network.  

Taking People Movers a step further to streetcar networks on the ground, rather than loop rail systems "in the air."

In transit advocacy circles, "everyone" seems to think everything should be a light rail or subway.  I got in an argument on a Reddit list a couple years ago when someone argued that the Richmond Virginia Pulse BRT, which has 7,000 daily riders, "should be light rail!"  WTF?  

Streetcars are the right sized transit mode for cities of certain sizes and conditions, and can be complementary to other fixed transit modes in larger cities, using North American cities Philadelphia, Toronto, and San Francisco as models--those cities have city specific subways, streetcars (Philly has one that goes to the suburbs), and commuter rail as well.

Toronto's King Street streetcar has over 50,000 daily riders.

So far, Portland is really the only city that is building a streetcar network serving the city proper, complementary to a city- and metro-focused light rail system.  

Originally the line was only on the west side (left side of the graphic).  Since it has been extended to East Portland, and further extensions are planned.  Kansas City just opened an extension and OKC plans extensions as well.

DC's streetcar has "failed" transit-wise despite it being an overwhelming success economically because they didn't build a network of lines, even though that was the original plan.  

And seeing the economic development effect on H Street NE, which is near but not quite close enough to the subway makes very clear that other parts of the city--Georgia Avenue NW, Kennedy Street-Riggs Road, East of the River, east from Minnesota Avenue Metrorail station, Rhode Island Avenue--could have had seen significant economic boosts from streetcars.

Conclusion.  The value of high quality intra-district transit should not be downplayed.  Especially given the economic development effects. 

 A better argument needs to be made about streetcars and the new tax revenue streams resulting from the development--property, sales, personal and corporate income taxes--and how this more than covers annual operating costs.

Streetcars are especially good at boosting places that are already experiencing some revitalization success.

To be even more effective, streetcar service should be expanded from a line to a network.  For streetcars, probably polycentric design makes the most sense, because it functions monocentrically at the core of a city.

From the HNTB article, "Planning vibrant, sustainable transit-oriented developments":

1. Plan all aspects of development [no trickle down]
2. Solicit partnerships from all sides.
3. Build housing for all [Minneapolis and Phoenix have been good about supporting the development of affordable housing in association with the development of their light rail systems; earlier systems relied on developer-driven development which usually was market rate]
4. Promote equitable development.
5. Value capture to invest in transit [in DC, private sector actors offered to manage and expand the streetcar system, but DC ignored their proposal]
6. Think beyond fixed rail.

Neoclassical architecture as government architecture

I haven't written about this go around with the Trump Administration's promotion of neoclassical architecture for government buildings ("MAKING FEDERAL ARCHITECTURE BEAUTIFUL AGAIN," White House, "The White House issues executive order mandating classical and traditional architectural design for federal buildings," Architect's Newspaper).  From the article:

The EO specifically applies to “all federal courthouses and agency headquarters,” “all federal public buildings in the National Capital Region,” and “all other federal public buildings that cost or are expected to cost more than $50 million in 2025 dollars to design.”

Deconstructivist and Brutalist styles are no good, this EO declares. Instead, other styles—and their practitioners—should be emulated. Architects to aspire to, the EO states, are Alberti, Brunelleschi, Michelangelo, and Palladio; Enlightenment masters Robert Adam, John Soane, and Christopher Wren; and 19th-century architects Benjamin Henry Latrobe, Robert Mills, and Thomas U. Walter.

Department of Labor headquarters.

Then again, you can always gussy up a newer building with a banner promoting Trump.

He promulgated a similar order towards the end of his first term, too late to make an impact.  

I wonder about the impact anyway since the Administration is focused on the sell off of federal properties, is discarding leases of property, etc. ("The Trump administration took down a list of 400-plus federal buildings it might sell. Here’s what was on it," Boston Globe).

Although some of this is legitimate, as properties age the cost of rehabilitation may exceed the cost of building new ("The federal government could soon sell these three big downtown Boston buildings," Boston Globe).

Although there are good examples of the new, I actually favor the concept because so much of the modern architecture for government buildings feels cold to me.  And there is the monumentality of classical architecture that projects government, and to me civic identity.  That's what I believe the City Beautiful Movement was about, according to Kathleen Lamp:

According to historian Jon Peterson, City Beautiful was a progressive-era urban planning and beautification movement that brought together municipal art (sometimes called “decoration”), outdoor art (landscape architecture), comprehensive city planning, and city services (city water, sewer, trash and snow removal).

Those are the elements of urban design and placemaking that I've advocated for since the start of the blog.

Generally, architecture and planning communities don't favor the proposal, wanting there to be the possibility of innovation and new forms of monumentality incorporated in new buildings, to be constructed of their time, rather than the period of 1895-1930 or so.

Old Courthouse in St. Louis, with the Gateway Arch in the background.  

New York Times photo.

Kriston Capps wrote about it for Bloomberg some time ago, "Trump's Politics of Urban Disgust," where he discusses Trump's campaign for remaking the capital.  We've heard of plans for a new ballroom for the White House, eradication of the Rose Garden at the White House, the design related executive order, and other interventions.  

President Donald Trump addresses a dinner for donors who have contributed to build the new ballroom at the White House, Wednesday, Oct. 15, 2025, in Washington. (AP Photo/John McDonnell)

Today we learn that Trump wants to build another crazy scheme, an Arc de Triomphe by the Lincoln Memorial ("Trump plans to leave his mark on Washington by building a Paris-like arch near the Lincoln Memorial," AP).

This idea of the neoclassical is a revival of the City Beautiful movement, with monumental white marble neoclassical buildings, often in the form of a campus. 

Given that Union Station in DC is an example, I've favored the concept.  The station is vibrant inside and out, even if to some the building may appear to be a mausoleum from the outside.  (The old Main Post Office building to the left of the Station is also neo-classical in design.  New stations of the time were often built with post office buildings next door to facilitate transfer of mail to the railroad postal cars.)

OTOH, there is the Cleveland City Beautiful campus with an auditorium and other buildings, and at least when I experienced it, it felt cold and empty even if the buildings are attractive.  This was the root of the criticism of the movement by Jane Jacobs, big buildings, large spaces not amenable to use and people.

Cleveland Mall, Cleveland, Oh - Photos by Janelle D'Avignon, 2023

But strictly design-wise, rather than from the placemaking standpoint, it's pretty cool.

I hate to admit I wasn't familiar with scholarship on the movement looking at the South's implementation of City Beautiful which was used to cement the Lost Cause ideology through statuary and urban renewal of black areas, such as in Charlottesville, Virginia.(Also see "Tools of Displacement," Slate.)

Note that for a long time, I did recognize DC's Union Station was an early form of urban renewal as it wiped out a poor community--Italian and Irish, not black, called Swampoodle, through the construction of the large railyard behind the station. 

Railyard, 1977.

These days, the parking lots to the right are all redeveloped as part of the NoMA district ("Union Station in Washington Has a Grand Development Plan," New York Times, "NoMa: The Neighborhood That Transit Built," Urban Land).

Photo: Drew Angerer, New York Times.

Same with the federal government's campaign to replace or eliminate alley dwellings on the interior of blocks, which were often domiciles for low income blacks, and of course the Southwest Urban Renewal program.

Trump's association with neoclassical likely dooms support from progressives, especially because after the City Beautiful period the adherents were dictators ("The good, the bad and the ugly – neoclassical architecture in modern times," Apollo Magazine).

The Trump Administration as transit troll

I have been reading a bunch of books about the genesis of Broken Windows policing theory as implemented in New York City.  Jack Maple (The Crime Fighter: Putting the Bad Guys Out of Business) makes the point that regardless of the success of crime suppression programs, there will always be high profile incidents.

These incidents support the perception of crime ridden streets and the need to be fearful, even when the counter case is so strong.

This comes up because a couple weeks ago, after a killing on the Charlotte, NC light rail system ("Deadly stabbing on Charlotte train highlights America's transit safety challenges," ABC11), the Trump Administration used this event as an excuse to suggest defunding transit ("Trump Admin Issues New Threat After Charlotte Train Killing," Newsweek).

Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy said, “Safety needs to be the top priority of elected officials. Citizens don’t want federal dollars going to public transportation that local leaders refuse to keep safe!”

-- "Trump Admin To Redirect $2.4 Billion From California's High-Speed Rail Project To National Rail Program," Benzinga 
-- "How the Trump administration is targeting green transportation in blue states," Grist
-- "Trump Grant Program Pours Money Into Roads, Mostly Ignores Transit Projects," Streetsblog USA
-- "Trump administration threatens to pull New York transit funds as it questions anti-crime efforts," AP
-- "Everyone to Congress: Stand Up and Fight for the Infrastructure Funding You Allocated (And Your Constituents Need)," Streetsblog USA
-- "Judge temporarily blocks Trump administration’s new transit and homelessness grant conditions," AP

The fact is, transit is safer than driving ("We Need a Reality Check on Crime, Safety and Transit," "New York City’s Subway Is Actually Safer Than Your Car," Bloomberg).  

An article in the Washington Post, "845,000 dead on U.S. highways. Why not address the main cause?," makes the point that almost 40,000 people die each year from motor vehicle accidents, while many more are injured, some severely.  From the article:

Approximately 94 percent of car crashes involve some form of driver behavior like speeding, distraction, failing to yield or DUI identified as a contributing factor, although this doesn’t mean the driver is always solely responsible — bad roads, confusing or obscured signage, wildlife darting into the road, mechanical failures and other factors play their part, too.

Why aren't there calls to stop producing automobiles, close down roads and make everyone walk?  Also see the Detroit News article, "Efforts to lower pedestrian fatalities in Pontiac 'made an impact,' sheriff says":

Sheriff Mike Bouchard on Sept. 5 ordered a patrol increase in "hot spots" for these types of collisions in Pontiac. His order was in response to a string of seven hit-and-run crashes that caused serious injury or death in the city this year.

Over the following two weeks, sheriff's deputies issued 78 warnings to people crossing streets in designated no-crossing zones and issued 116 citations for violations including speeding and texting while driving. The sheriff's office crash reconstruction unit also had no calls in Pontiac in that time, according to a news release.

"Our traffic unit did a great job stepping up enforcement in areas with multiple pedestrian accidents,” Bouchard said. “Their focus on both pedestrian and driver behavior clearly made an impact.”

Similarly, many opponents to bicycle trails say it will increase crime.  It's true, it does at the margins, because increasing access to places leads to some criminal activity.  

But the use of cars in the commission of crimes on a daily basis is more than the use of bikes--although some intrepid criminals realize the value of bike access to committing crime.  From the Post:

In one of the five reported robberies, police said six juveniles on red Capital Bikeshare bicycles carried out a holdup early Sunday in the 1100 block of Third Street SW. One of the youths had a gun, police said.

just as police departments realize bike-based cops can go places cars cannot ("The Rise, Fall, and Rebirth of Bicycle Police"), similarly with bike-based EMS crews for special events ("How to start a bike medic team," EMS1).  

Plus cars problem double as they are often "the victims" of crime (Preventing Car Crimes, Urban Institute).

What a great headline (about Trump's takeover of the city police department in Washington DC) | and more on disorder

======= 

This is a follow up to an entry last week, "Trump's takeover of DC's police: a warning and another episode in his anti-urban (blue voters) agenda."

 =======

"More High-Crime States Send National Guard to Tame Washington" from New York Magazine.  It riffs on the point that many states overall have much worse crime problems than the nation's big cities. 

Panel 3 from the This Modern World editorial cartoon by Tom Tomorrow, 8/18/2025.

Trump claims the city is ridden with crime ("Inside Week 1 of Trump’s ‘hostile takeover’ of D.C. police," "On Trump’s order, dozens arrested daily in D.C. The details are hidden," and "We asked 604 D.C. residents about Trump’s takeover. Here’s what they said," Washington Post).  

Red state governors are getting in on the fun by sending National Guard troops to assist the federal officers that came with Trump's takeover of the police department.

Crime in DC is dropping, as it is across the nation ("Violent crime is falling rapidly across America," Economist) albeit not so great in the places that are persistently high crime areas--which the federal law enforcement officers seem to be avoiding, sticking to places mostly in Northwest DC, but dipping into the Capitol Hill area of Southeast, and into Northeast DC ("D.C. is hard to police. But the federal takeover won’t stop crime," Post). 

Note that youth crime is a different story, DC has some real issues that aren't being adequately addressed ("How D.C.'s failure to curb truancy fueled a surge in youth crime," "On the box D.C. court officials repeatedly lost track of teens wearing ankle monitors. The timing was deadly," "Serving ‘dead time’ D.C. teens needed rehabilitation to keep the city safe: They languished in a violent detention center instead," Post).

Most people argue that if Trump really cared, he'd offer resources to cities ("On D.C., Trump has the right idea but the wrong reaction. As usual," Post), a point I made in his first adminstration ("Elijah Cummings, President Trump and Revisiting "The Urban Agenda"").  From the Post:

• Instead of diverting hundreds of FBI agents and other federal officers from the vital work they do on national security and complex crimes, Trump could have pushed to give the District the resources it needs to recruit and train enough police officers to get back to full strength after pandemic and budget woes led to a wave of retirements and resignations. 
• He could also have pressed Congress to restore funding cuts that led the D.C. Council to trim services this year. Such moves would have been an enduring fix rather than a four-week show.
• Rather than stationing hundreds of National Guard troops to hang out on street corners — a movie we’ve seen before, such as during Trump I, in the tense summer following the killing of George Floyd in 2020 — the president could have advocated funding to address the city’s breathtaking truancy rate.
• Almost a third of D.C. schoolchildren routinely skip school — an improvement over the early post-pandemic years, when truancy rates topped 40 percent, but still an appalling number. Federal funding for counselors and truancy officers would have been a helpful gesture, as would federal expertise from the Education Department.

Paste poster graffiti mocking how federal officers arrested someone for throwing a sandwich at them.  The Judge didn't agree with the hard core charges they presented.

The places the officers are congregating in are high profile areas, where sometimes, crime does leak into, because of how small the city is and how easy it is to move to these areas for better "targets."  But they are mostly "white" areas, where crime is relatively low, especially violent crime.

Restaurant sales are down as people are avoiding Washington ("‘The city is dead’: D.C. restaurant reservations drop amid federal crackdown," Post) although Trump states the opposite.

“Dozens of DC small businesses, restaurants, and local shops have closed their doors due to the violent crime that has plagued the city. President Trump’s bold leadership will restore our nation’s capital by creating opportunities for businesses to flourish without fear of criminals looting and destroying their property. President Trump is delivering on his promise to make DC safer, which will inherently make D.C, more prosperous,” spokeswoman Taylor Rogers said in a statement.

National Guard at GWU-Foggy Bottom Metrorail Station, Washington, DC.  

Photo: Andrew Leyden, Getty Images.

On the lookout for crime in Union Station.  Reddit photo.

Federal officers swarm on a guy sitting on a park bench in Mount Pleasant.  Reddit photo.

The forces aren't being deployed to the actual high crime areas, in the city pockets in Wards 7 and 8 "East of the River," or impoverished areas of Wards 4, 5, and 6.  From the New York Times article, "Where D.C. Crime Is Bad, Residents Question Trump’s Motives": 

In the Congress Heights neighborhood in the southeast corner of Washington, D.C., where there have been several murders and more than a dozen robberies so far this year, residents have greeted President Trump’s promise of liberation from crime with a mix of skepticism, suspicion and outright derision. It’s not that they don’t believe crime is a problem in the nation’s capital. They know it is.

Federal law enforcement officers patrolling the Georgetown Waterfront.

“If Trump is genuinely concerned about safety of D.C. residents, I would see National Guard in my neighborhood,” said Karen Lake, 62, a lawyer who has lived in Congress Heights since 2017, in the far eastern corner of the diamond-shaped district. “I’m not seeing it, and I don’t expect to see it. I don’t think Trump is bringing in the National Guard to protect Black babies in Southeast.”

“I don’t think Trump is bringing in the National Guard to protect Black babies in Southeast,” a Washingtonian said, as troops patrolled the National Mall. Credit: Kenny Holston/The New York Times 

They just don’t believe the president cares -- at least not about them. If he did, they asked, why are residents hearing of federal agents roving the whiter areas of 16th Street Northwest but less so in their largely Black neighborhood? Why are National Guard members posing with tourists at the Washington Monument?

Protest against the federal takeover of the DC police department.

This is more about the theater of authoritarianism ("‘Hallmarks of authoritarianism’: Trump banks on loyalists as he wages war on truth," "We’re anti-federal chaos’: Democratic cities prepare for worst after Trump’s tirades against DC and LA," Guardian) and power and intimidation ("Border Patrol Agents Show Up in Force at Newsom Rally," New York Times) in challenging "blue voters" in the cities where Trump loses "bigly" ("Black mayors of cities Trump decries as ‘lawless’ tout significant declines in violent crimes," "Trump’s unprecedented show of force in L.A., Washington is pushing norms, sparking fears," Los Angeles Times).

==============

Disorder.  Living in DC in the bad times of the 80s and 90s made me quite focused on disorder as an element of public safety.  I joke that it is a fine line between order and disorder that cities should never cross--e.g., decriminalizing "small" crimes ends up being an invitation to keep behaving anti-socially.

-- "Redefining what public safety means: Community Safety Partnership, Los Angeles"

Commenter charlie has made the point that demand for urban living increased so much c. 2000 because of the noticeable decline in crime.

Wall Street Journal article, 6/11/2007, 

about the impact of crime reduction on urban improvement and the attraction of new residents.

The Economist article ("Violent crime is falling rapidly across America,") discusse  in detail the various people-centered anti-crime efforts in Baltimore, which seem to be having great success 

I was reading some great pieces about disorder, triggered by a New York Times article, "What Republicans and Democrats Get Wrong About Crime," and a Paul Krugman interview with Jeff Asher. 

In "It's Time to Talk About America's Disorder Problem" Charles Lehman makes the point that social disorder (the idea of "fixing broken windows") is different from crime per se, but people continue to believe crime is high because of very evident social disorder problems like homeless camping, unkempt areas, graffiti, and petty crime

.

There are links to other resources:

-- "Disorder policing to reduce crime: An updated systematic review and meta-analysis," Criminology and Public Policy
-- Special issue, Policing Practice and Policy (open access), Criminology and Public Policy
-- "The Community’s Credible Threat: Effective policing is a prerequisite for preserving order," City Journal
-- Preventing Public Disorder, Urban Institute
-- Center for Problem Oriented Policing, Arizona State University