Howard County just released the draft Complete Streets Design Manual.
Complete Streets are great!
I ride my bike all over. I love the idea of Complete Streets. I would love to have Complete Streets in Elkridge, where there is no bicycle infrastructure beyond some sharrows and Share the Road signs.Before I retired, I was a daily bike commuter for several years between my home in Lawyers Hill in Elkridge and my workplace in the Village of Kings Contrivance in Columbia. The Elkridge part of my commute was pretty harrowing. The only way to cross I-95 is Montgomery Road, which you have to ride for 2 1/2 miles with no little or no shoulder and heavy traffic driving too fast. But once I got to Columbia, to the Long Reach Village Center, I could ride on the Columbia trail network, along Lake Elkhorn, to the Patuxent River Trail to MacGill's Commons, right by my office. This part of my bike commute was safe, easy, and wonderful.
The community meetings on the county bike infrastructure have repeatedly stated that the Complete Streets policy will be focused on Equity. When people say "Equity" I think of this cartoon.
The Process for Prioritizing Complete Streets Projects is Biased and Unfair.
I had high hoped that an equitable Complete Streets policy would result in all parts of the county having good bike infrastructure. Just like everyone can see over the fence in the cartoon.That's not what's going to happen.
The reason that's not going to happen is the prioritization criteria for Complete Streets projects are heavily biased in favor of Columbia, and the prioritization criteria do not include any consideration whatsoever of where bike infrastructure and complete streets already exist and where they do not.
In other words, the prioritization criteria are biased in favor of the kid who can already see over the wall, and the criteria don't even consider who can see over the wall and who can't.
And what about the tall guy on the left? I'm pretty sure that this guy does not exist in regards to Howard County bike infrastructure. But you would not know it from the Complete Streets manual and the Complete Streets law, which says this:
"Equity scores are driven by the Vulnerable Population Index and map developed in response to concerns that wealth and access to decision makers has played an overly significant role in transportation decisions over the years. Greater investment is needed in traditionally underserved communities." (Appendix B page 1)
This is based on a false premise that there is some wealthy part of the county with privileged access to decision makers that has received a disproportionate amount of investment in bike infrastructure. I don't know what that part of the county is. The part of the county with privileged access to decision makers is Columbia, due to the influence of Howard Hughes Corporation and its predecessors. As a result, Columbia already has by far the best bike infrastructure. However, Columbia also has the most census tracts with the greatest Vulnerable Population Index scores. The areas with high VPI scores in Columbia are not in reality underserved in terms of bike infrastructure.
Now I know who the tall guy is on the left side of Equity cartoon.
And what about the tall guy on the left? I'm pretty sure that this guy does not exist in regards to Howard County bike infrastructure. But you would not know it from the Complete Streets manual and the Complete Streets law, which says this:
"Equity scores are driven by the Vulnerable Population Index and map developed in response to concerns that wealth and access to decision makers has played an overly significant role in transportation decisions over the years. Greater investment is needed in traditionally underserved communities." (Appendix B page 1)
This is based on a false premise that there is some wealthy part of the county with privileged access to decision makers that has received a disproportionate amount of investment in bike infrastructure. I don't know what that part of the county is. The part of the county with privileged access to decision makers is Columbia, due to the influence of Howard Hughes Corporation and its predecessors. As a result, Columbia already has by far the best bike infrastructure. However, Columbia also has the most census tracts with the greatest Vulnerable Population Index scores. The areas with high VPI scores in Columbia are not in reality underserved in terms of bike infrastructure.
Now I know who the tall guy is on the left side of Equity cartoon.
It's Strawman Guy, an artificial invention to make it look like Columbia Kid is disadvantaged.
It's pretty ridiculous that when the Complete Streets policy says a community is "underserved" it has nothing to do with whether that community has any Complete Streets.
A Deep Dive into the Prioritization Criteria
Let's take a look at some of the Complete Streets project prioritization criteria from Appendix B in the design manual. EQUITY (10 possible) If a project is located in more than one census tract, the higher VPI will be used.
• Project is in a census tract with a VPI of 6 or higher: 10 points
• Project is in a census tract with a VPI between 3 and 5: 5 points
• Project is in a census tract with a VPI of 2 or less: 0 points
Columbia has the most census tracts with the highest VPI scores. And no matter how many complete streets projects are built in Columbia, they will continue to have the highest VPI scores, and will therefore have priority for all future complete street projects. Another issue with the VPI scores is the weighting doubles when the score goes from 5 to 6. It would be more fair to have a smoother mapping. Perhaps the priority points awarded should just be equal to the VPI score.
Columbia Kid: "I'm in a census tract with a high VPI! I'm first in line for another box! Yippee!"
Elkridge Kid: "My census tract has a moderate VPI, so I guess it must be more important for Columbia kid to get another box than it is for me to be able to see over the fence."
Transit access
• Project provides new or improved bus stops, enhancements to existing bus service, and/or improved access to bus stops: 4 points
• Project does not improve bus stops or access to bus stops: 0 points
Columbia has far more bus stops and more bus lines that any other part of the county. One would think that areas with relatively poor or no bus service would get a preference for complete streets projects to compensate for the lack of transportation alternatives. Instead, those with more transportation alternatives are favored.
Also, why is only bus service considered? Why is there no priority for complete streets projects that provide access to MARC stations, like the Dorsey, Savage, and Laurel stations?
Columbia Kid: "I have great bus service! I get another box! Yippee!"
Elkridge Kid: "I don't live near a bus stop. I'm close to the Dorsey MARC Station, but I have no safe way to cross MD 100 to get there."
SYSTEM PRESERVATION/MAINTENANCE (10 possible)
• Project is principally focused on maintaining existing infrastructure and/or is expected to create no (or minimal) additional maintenance needs: 10 points
• Project is principally focused on maintaining existing infrastructure and/or is expected to create modest additional maintenance needs: 5 points
• Project is principally focused on creating new infrastructure and/or will create additional maintenance needs: 0 points
This runs totally counter to the notion of providing access to everyone, and it is another example of unambigous bias in favor of Columbia, where most of the existing bike infrastructure is located.
Columbia Kid: "This is great! My box will always be well maintained and I will always be able to see over the fence."
Elkridge Kid: "I guess it's not worth it for me to see over the fence, because it would cost too much to maintain a box for me.
BONUS POINTS FOR COST SHARING (10 points)
Columbia has the most census tracts with the highest VPI scores. And no matter how many complete streets projects are built in Columbia, they will continue to have the highest VPI scores, and will therefore have priority for all future complete street projects. Another issue with the VPI scores is the weighting doubles when the score goes from 5 to 6. It would be more fair to have a smoother mapping. Perhaps the priority points awarded should just be equal to the VPI score.
Columbia Kid: "I'm in a census tract with a high VPI! I'm first in line for another box! Yippee!"
Elkridge Kid: "My census tract has a moderate VPI, so I guess it must be more important for Columbia kid to get another box than it is for me to be able to see over the fence."
Transit access
• Project provides new or improved bus stops, enhancements to existing bus service, and/or improved access to bus stops: 4 points
• Project does not improve bus stops or access to bus stops: 0 points
Columbia has far more bus stops and more bus lines that any other part of the county. One would think that areas with relatively poor or no bus service would get a preference for complete streets projects to compensate for the lack of transportation alternatives. Instead, those with more transportation alternatives are favored.
Also, why is only bus service considered? Why is there no priority for complete streets projects that provide access to MARC stations, like the Dorsey, Savage, and Laurel stations?
Columbia Kid: "I have great bus service! I get another box! Yippee!"
Elkridge Kid: "I don't live near a bus stop. I'm close to the Dorsey MARC Station, but I have no safe way to cross MD 100 to get there."
SYSTEM PRESERVATION/MAINTENANCE (10 possible)
• Project is principally focused on maintaining existing infrastructure and/or is expected to create no (or minimal) additional maintenance needs: 10 points
• Project is principally focused on maintaining existing infrastructure and/or is expected to create modest additional maintenance needs: 5 points
• Project is principally focused on creating new infrastructure and/or will create additional maintenance needs: 0 points
This runs totally counter to the notion of providing access to everyone, and it is another example of unambigous bias in favor of Columbia, where most of the existing bike infrastructure is located.
Columbia Kid: "This is great! My box will always be well maintained and I will always be able to see over the fence."
Elkridge Kid: "I guess it's not worth it for me to see over the fence, because it would cost too much to maintain a box for me.
BONUS POINTS FOR COST SHARING (10 points)
• Project leverages at least 75 percent non-County funds (Federal, State, and/or private) to reduce
cost to County taxpayers: 10 points
• Project leverages at least 50 percent (but less than 75 percent) non-County funds: 7 points
• Project leverages at least 25 percent (but less than 50 percent) non-County funds: 4 points
• Project leverages some non-County funds, but less than 25 percent: 1 point
• Project uses only County funds: 0 points
There are many parties who are willing to share the cost of new bike infrastructure for projects in Columbia, from the Columbia Association to the Howard Hughes Corporation to the Horizon Foundation. For other parts of the county, not so much. This is another example of bias in favor of Columbia projects. Furthermore, in Elkridge, nearby projects paid for by third parties are used as an excuse for Howard County not to propose projects at all! (Examples are the Patapsco Heritage Greenway connector to Guinness, and the Grist Mill Trail in Patapsco State Park.)
Columbia Kid: "I have a rich uncle, Howard Horizon, who looks after me. He will pay part for the cost for another box for me. Yippee!"
Elkridge Kid: "I don't have a rich uncle. I guess I will never see over the fence."
Motor vehicle access
• Project addresses a documented traffic congestion concern based on the results of a traffic study: 4 points
• Project is expected to improve traffic congestion, but a traffic study has not been conducted: 2 points
• Project is not expected to address traffic congestion: 0 points
There are many parties who are willing to share the cost of new bike infrastructure for projects in Columbia, from the Columbia Association to the Howard Hughes Corporation to the Horizon Foundation. For other parts of the county, not so much. This is another example of bias in favor of Columbia projects. Furthermore, in Elkridge, nearby projects paid for by third parties are used as an excuse for Howard County not to propose projects at all! (Examples are the Patapsco Heritage Greenway connector to Guinness, and the Grist Mill Trail in Patapsco State Park.)
Columbia Kid: "I have a rich uncle, Howard Horizon, who looks after me. He will pay part for the cost for another box for me. Yippee!"
Elkridge Kid: "I don't have a rich uncle. I guess I will never see over the fence."
Motor vehicle access
• Project addresses a documented traffic congestion concern based on the results of a traffic study: 4 points
• Project is expected to improve traffic congestion, but a traffic study has not been conducted: 2 points
• Project is not expected to address traffic congestion: 0 points
I remember one day I was riding home near Lake Elkhorn and I came upon some people doing a survey of people using the Columbia multi-purpose path. They said they were doing a traffic survey to justify widening the path. I asked them who was doing the survey, and it was someone like the Horizon Foundation or the Columbia Association. This made me sad, because there is nobody who is going to do surveys like this in Elkridge.
Columbia Kid: "Did you know my rich uncle also does traffic surveys! Everyone will know I need another box!"
Elkridge Kid: "I don't have a rich uncle. Nobody knows I can't see over the fence."
You get the picture here. The bias in the project scoring is pervasive. Any project in Columbia is going to score better than a project elsewhere, no matter how bad the bike infrastructure is elsewhere compared with what is already built in Columbia.
Here are some suggestions on how to improve the project scoring.
1. First, define the level of service that the county intends to provide to all residents, and document where this service exists and where it does not. Examples of services might include:
* Safe access to schools
Columbia Kid: "Did you know my rich uncle also does traffic surveys! Everyone will know I need another box!"
Elkridge Kid: "I don't have a rich uncle. Nobody knows I can't see over the fence."
You get the picture here. The bias in the project scoring is pervasive. Any project in Columbia is going to score better than a project elsewhere, no matter how bad the bike infrastructure is elsewhere compared with what is already built in Columbia.
How to Fix the Problem
Here are some suggestions on how to improve the project scoring.1. First, define the level of service that the county intends to provide to all residents, and document where this service exists and where it does not. Examples of services might include:
* Safe access to schools
* Safe access to parks
* Safe access to shopping centers with groceries
* Safe access to transit hubs
* Connections across barriers like limited access freeways and railroad tracks
Then prioritize these services, and weight the scoring to favor providing high priority service to areas which don't have it, over providing lower priority services to areas that already receive the high priority services. It would be perfectly appropriate to apply the VPI score within a category of service. The service priorities and implemented baseline should be part of the annual reporting requirements.
* Safe access to shopping centers with groceries
* Safe access to transit hubs
* Connections across barriers like limited access freeways and railroad tracks
Then prioritize these services, and weight the scoring to favor providing high priority service to areas which don't have it, over providing lower priority services to areas that already receive the high priority services. It would be perfectly appropriate to apply the VPI score within a category of service. The service priorities and implemented baseline should be part of the annual reporting requirements.
2. Explicitly require fair geographic distribution by both council district and planning region of some portion of the county complete streets budget. To date, Columbia has received an overwhelming share of the capital investment, even though it already has the best infrastructure in the county. This is not fair. It makes a mockery of the notion of equity. There are vulnerable populations all over the county, but Columbia gets an overwhelming share of the improvements because they have the highest VPI census tracts. Everyone should get a share. All Howard County taxpayers contribute to the complete streets budget and all parts of the county should have some complete streets projects.
3. Expand the reporting requirements in the Complete Streets policy to break out each reporting item by council district and planning region. That should include both the number of projects, outcome metrics, and dollars spent by both the county and by third parties.
No comments:
Post a Comment