{"id":260,"date":"2009-07-30T23:54:40","date_gmt":"2009-07-31T04:54:40","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/cityblock.wordpress.com\/?p=260"},"modified":"2011-01-27T19:19:35","modified_gmt":"2011-01-28T00:19:35","slug":"moving-time","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.alexblock.net\/blog\/2009\/07\/30\/moving-time\/","title":{"rendered":"Moving Time"},"content":{"rendered":"
\"Moving<\/a>

Moving boxes by carlaarena on Flickr<\/p><\/div>\n

Posting’s been light the last couple of days because I’ve been moving from one house to another.\u00a0 No matter how many times I do it, I still forget what a pain it can be.\u00a0 Now that I’m finally settling into the new digs, there’s been a whole lot of things worth commenting on posted in the past few days.<\/p>\n

First, Richard Layman<\/strong> gave me a link on his blog<\/a>, noting that we tend to disagree on a couple of things.\u00a0 Though Richard and I do diverge on a number of issues, I think it’s worth noting that we’d agree on far more topics than not – including the general overall direction for the District and cities in general.\u00a0\u00a0 I’d also point out that a trend I notice in blog commenting in general (and many of my comments in particular) is that the truncated nature of the medium tends to focus my comments on one or two ideas from a post, and too often those ideas are critical rather than positive.\u00a0 That’s the nature of the beast, I guess.<\/p>\n

Thanks to Richard for having so much great info on his blog, I appreciate the link.<\/p>\n

Poplar Point is a popular<\/strong> discussion item again.\u00a0 GGW summarizes the development options<\/a> presented, and Richard Layman chimes in<\/a>.\u00a0 Both note that all the options leave a little something to be desired.\u00a0 One thing none of them have, however, is a soccer stadium – yet.\u00a0 DC United officials have been chatting with Akridge<\/a> about property they own, and is apparently still talking to DC officials about Poplar Point – though no one wants to admit anything.<\/p>\n

All this stadium talk triggered a response from Noah Kazis at The City Fix<\/a>.<\/p>\n

While it\u2019s good to see the Journal<\/em>\u2019s real estate blog thinking about neighborhoods rather than just individual sites, this is a common misunderstanding of how stadiums work. They aren\u2019t vibrant providers of economic development; rather, they sit empty most of the time. The D.C. United schedule calls for 30 games a year<\/a>, only 15 of which will be at the United\u2019s stadium (not including playoffs, exhibition games and the like). That\u2019s not enough to really spark development. While a built-in market of absolutely packed crowds at your sports bar is great for those 15 nights, the rest of the time you\u2019ve got an enormous empty structure that will inevitably be surrounded by at least some large parking lots. That\u2019s not a draw for street life.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

First, I want to address a factual item.\u00a0 DC United’s league schedule only has 15 home games, but DC United plays in several competitions beyond just MLS each year.\u00a0 Just this past Tuesday I was in attendance at RFK for a game in the CONCACAF Champions League.\u00a0 DCU also plays in the US Open Cup every year, plus there is also the SuperLiga, international friendlies, and plenty of games between National teams.\u00a0 RFK will host the US Men’s National Team three times this calendar year, and has already played host to international matches between two non-US nations – drawing good crowds, too.<\/p>\n

This issue of the number of games each year often is mis-stated, as most American sports fans don’t have experience with the idea of multiple, concurrent competitions as is commonplace in soccer leagues across the world (including MLS).\u00a0 Most North American pro sports have their league’s regular season and then the playoffs – and that’s it.\u00a0 Soccer has a whole lot more on the schedule, and it’s important to note that.<\/p>\n

Still, I don’t think this changes the end result of Noah’s analysis.\u00a0 Stadiums aren’t great for developing streetlife per se, but they can be an anchor to draw in crowds that would otherwise never venture into that part of the city.<\/p>\n

I’d also argue that justifications for sports stadiums on pure economic grounds are misplaced from the start.\u00a0 Sports are an important part of the civic identity of a city, and it’s important for cities to foster that connection.\u00a0 Going so far as to hand over an expensive stadium on a silver platter (Nationals Park) probably crosses the line, but there’s something to be said for being a “major league” city.\u00a0 DC United shouldn’t be an exception.<\/p>\n

K Street’s transitway plans<\/strong> are moving forward<\/a>, and not a moment too soon.\u00a0 The two options at this point:<\/p>\n

One option would create a two-lane busway in the center of K Street, leaving three general-purpose lanes on each side. The other option, on the other hand, makes the transitway three lanes, where the third lane lets eastbound buses pass each other in some spots and westbound buses pass each other in other spots. That option also contains a bicycle lane along the length of K Street. While at first glance the plans seem to provide a clear choice between more accommodation for cars versus more for buses and bikes, the difference isn’t that simple. Making a true “complete street” that works for all modes is not easy.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

A nice debate emerged in the comments about bike lanes vs. trees vs. transit.\u00a0 Leaving that discussion of priorities for another day, I’d offer one comment – I’d like to see a plan that can accommodate rail transit and buses on the same transitway in the space at the same time.\u00a0 Seattle recently started doing this as they converted their downtown bus tunnel to handle both light rail and bus operations:<\/p>\n