Live chat with Chris Zimmerman
Welcome to our live chat with Chris Zimmerman, Member of the Arlington County Board and many transportation-related regional steering bodies, including Metro, VRE, and the Northern Virginia Transportation Commission. Feel free to settle in early and start posting your questions. We’ll start the discussion at 1 pm. Mr. Zimmerman looks forward to taking your questions.
| Live chat with Chris Zimmerman | (04/16/2009) |
12:50 | GreaterGreaterWashington: Welcome to Greater Greater Washington’s live chat with Chris Zimmerman, member the Arlington County Board, Metro Board, VRE Board, and many other Northern Virginia transportation boards. |
12:50 | GreaterGreaterWashington: We’ll be starting in just a few minutes. In the meantime, you can submit your questions in the box at the bottom of the chat. |
12:56 | GreaterGreaterWashington: Mr. Zimmerman is now here with us. Welcome! |
12:57 | CZ: Good Afternoon. |
12:57 | Michael Perkins: Mr. Zimmerman, thanks for chatting with us today and for your efforts to improve transit regionally. As an Arlington resident, thank you also for your service on the County Board.
|
12:57 | CZ: Thanks for inviting me. |
12:57 | Michael Perkins: Let’s get started with WMATA. |
12:57 | [Comment From Tim] Mr. Zimmerman, what’s your opinion of the recent vote by the DC representatives on the WMATA Board to block consideration of a small fare increase to close this year’s operating deficit? |
12:59 | CZ: I disagreed with their position (as did all the representatives from Maryland and Virginia). We would have liked to give the public a chance to comment on a fare alternative to cuts. At the hearing last night, quite a few speakers said that they would prefer a small fare increase to the potential cuts. |
12:59 | Michael Perkins: That’s the comment I would have given. We’re almost certainly going to have a fare increase next year, right?
|
12:59 | CZ: Yes. |
1:00 | Michael Perkins: Is the fare increase basically going to be an inflationary adjustment or do you think it might need to be more than that? |
1:02 | CZ: The intention of the policy adopted just last year, which I strongly supported, was for a biennial adjustment on a more or less cost-of-living basis. Now I am concerned that we will be in a position of having to look at a much higher increase, or seeing even larger service cuts than those currently contemplated. |
1:03 | Michael Perkins: Here’s a question about a change in WMATA’s bus service. |
1:03 | [Comment From Kreeggo] Thank you for a great job generally on transit oriented development. I am critical of your decision to take over Metrobus Route 24P that is designated as a regional route—one that runs on major arterials and serves major activity centers. The route’s costs are shared by all jurisdiction because of its importance to the region as a whole. I feel that its a dangerous road to go down to have local jurisidictions taking on regional priorities. While you’ve done a great job—you won’t be here forever and you’re setting an example for others in the region who may not do such a great job on transit. Its also a further denegration of WMATA as a regional carrier—a role we should be building up not tearing down. |
1:04 | CZ: This is a big question—several really. Let me take it in parts. |
1:04 | Michael Perkins: For the benefit of the readers, 24P goes from Ballston to Pentagon, and under the proposal the route will be operated by ART, Arlington’s transit agency. |
1:04 | CZ: First, I would note that the entire route of the 24P, from start to finish is within Arlington. |
1:07 | CZ: Second, whether this is a “dangerous road to go down” is pretty much moot; jurisdictions have been creating their own bus services, and taking over Metrobus routes for a couple of decades. Arlington (and DC) are new to this, having only recently created local service. |
1:08 | CZ: I would also note that in Arlington we have been strongly committed to the regional service. We do not view ART (Arlington Transit) as a substitute for Metrobus, but as a complement. In fact, in the ten years we have been operating ART, we have actually increased our investments in Metrobus. That is, we are now offering more service on Metrobus than we were before. |
1:10 | CZ: Overall, having locally operated transit service is a way of offering more, and better service, and ultimately, increasing support for transit throughout the region. |
1:10 | Michael Perkins: With the fracturing of a previously unified service , this reduces the value of the Metrobus flash pass, would you support encouraging the regional providers to honor WMATA’s passes? |
1:13 | CZ: We have an integrated fare system in place (since the late 90s, now) that is pretty consistent across the region. Hence, you can use SmarTrip on all the local systems, and you can transfer seamlessly, with associated discounts. Of course, each provider determines their own fare policy; that’s a local budget decision. |
1:13 | [Comment From Joey] Regarding NextBus, I recall you mentioning that you hadn’t known the non-advertised beta existed and would have used it yourself had you known. Since the time of the publicity explosion, have you had a chance to use it privately, and what is your opinion as to its accuracy? (And, do you think we’re still on course for a June or July launch?) |
1:14 | CZ: Unfortunately, I found out about it when it was shut down, so I can’t access it any more than any other rider. |
1:15 | [Comment From Lewis] Mr. Zimmerman, do you favor having the Circulator extend into Arlington? Do you think the Circulator should continue to be expanded or is that a better role for MetroExpress? |
1:16 | Michael Perkins: I’ll just note that Circulator is operated by WMATA but funded by DC only, so it’s kind of your jurisdiction. |
1:16 | Michael Perkins: meant “kind of NOT your jurisdiction” sorry. |
1:18 | CZ: DC Circulator is a local service, as you note, so its expansion is really a matter for the DC Council. I can see many benefits to the system, just as we have found here with ART. I believe the regional service—specifically in connecting across jurisdictional lines—has its role to play, and that’s Metrobus. |
1:18 | [Comment From Joey] Has there been any effort to investigate funding the rush-only “North Arlington to downtown” 3Y service into a full-day service? It discourages riding the bus in North Arlington when we have to get off at Rosslyn and descend into the metro (and pay a premium) to go only a few stops, when the 3Y does it so well in peak times. The 3Y is also usually packed during those periods it operates. |
1:22 | CZ: This is a very good idea. In fact, one of the most important things our region—our country—could do to improve air quality and address climate change and reduce traffic and dependence on foreign oil and … okay—would be to provide high frequency, predictable service at times outside of “rush hour.” About 80 percent of all trips are not the to-and-from-work trips, yet the only time we provide much bus service is at peak times—that is, we provide commuter service, and not much else, in most of the region. |
1:22 | CZ: We don’t need to study, really, we just need a lot more money devoted to transit. |
1:23 | Michael Perkins: how can we as a transit-riding and enthusiast community effectively advocate for WMATA to get the funding it needs? |
1:23 | CZ: I have a long list of those kind of improvements (including the 3Y), if I can get funding. |
1:25 | CZ: Speaking of funding—it’s important to remember that WMATA doesn’t have money, all of that comes from other places, mostly state legislatures (directly or indirectly). In Virginia, the localities pick up the bill, but the authority for them to raise any money is all controlled by the General Assembly in Richmond. So, if you want things to change, you need to talk to state legislators—and of course, Congress. |
1:26 | Michael Perkins: Thanks. Let’s move on to some questions we have about VRE. |
1:26 | [Comment From Mark M] Mr. Zimmerman, I’m a VRE rider that lives close to the Rippon stop. I would love to ride my bike to the station, but there aren’t any bike racks! Is VRE looking into improving the facilities available for cyclists at this and other VRE Stations? |
1:27 | Michael Perkins: I’ll note that there are bike racks at most of the stations I looked at online, they’re just missing from the Rippon stop. |
1:28 | CZ: There has been much discussion of bikes and VRE, and there is interest in improving bike access. I confess I’m not familiar with the Rippon station issues, but I will be happy to bring it up at VRE. |
1:28 | Michael Perkins: The neighborhood around there looks pretty bikeable, by the way. He has another question about bikes that you can bring up… |
1:28 | [Comment From Mark M] An additional VRE Question: I heard that the new VRE cars will be large enough or have facilities to take regular sized (non-folding) bicycles. When do you expect to see these cars in service or a policy change that will allow me to bring my bicycle so I can ride from my destination to work? |
1:30 | CZ: I’m sorry, I don’t recall exactly, I will have to check on that. |
1:30 | Michael Perkins: That’s ok. |
1:30 | [Comment From Mark] Gainesville is growing very quickly and commuters living there and heading to DC are overwhelming I-66. Are there any plans to expand VRE service along the existing Amtrak tracks out to Gainesville, making it a new terminus? |
1:32 | CZ: A major study has been underway for some time (the “Gainesville-Haymarket Feasibility Study and Alternatives Analysis “). There is a public meeting coming up on May 5. |
1:33 | CZ: Go to http://www.vre.org/feedback/G-H/main-page.html |
1:33 | Michael Perkins: Thanks, we’ll post that one in our links section |
1:33 | [Comment From David Alpert] At one point, MARC and VRE were talking about through-routing trains, so that riders could continue from, say, Odenton to Alexandria, and trains wouldn’t all have to turn around at Union Station which takes time and space. Is that still something that might happen? |
1:35 | CZ: I think there is interest on both sides in doing that ultimately. A couple of years ago, there was the thought on the MARC side that this might be done quickly. Unfortunately, it turned out to be more complicated, operationally. Like a lot of things we would like to be able to do with commuter rail, we need much more investment in the track infrastructure to have this kind of flexibility. |
1:36 | CZ: Hopefully, with a new administration interested in rail service, that might become possible. |
1:36 | Michael Perkins: and the transit guys don’t really own the tracks, right? |
1:36 | CZ: That is exactly right. |
1:37 | Michael Perkins: Ok, let’s move on to development, more specifically in Arlington. |
1:37 | [Comment From Amy B] Mr. Zimmerman, East Falls Church Metro station must be the last station in Arlington that still has a surface parking lot and very little TOD. What’s the status of the task force to look at redeveloping that area? |
1:37 | CZ: In fact, that’s the biggest difference between VRE and Metro, or for that matter with some other commuter systems. |
1:38 | CZ: Working hard. Looking into a lot of options for improving the area around the station, to provide more services to folks in the neighborhood, and to make more efficient use of the station. There are some complications—like the fact that most of the WMATA parking lot is owned by VDOT. |
1:39 | Michael Perkins: Let’s hope that their efforts are ready for when the next real estate building boom comes around? |
1:39 | CZ: We hope to finish within about 12 months. |
1:40 | [Comment From Joey] There was a quick blurb in the Sun-Gazette a few months back about the Board and/or Staff beginning to consider long-range planning for Lee Highway. Has there been any work so far on the plans, and what is your feel for neighborhood support or opposition (as I understand the corridor traverses a dozen civic associations [similar to DC’s ANCs])? |
1:43 | CZ: There is much interest, especially from some of the civic associations. The Lee Highway corridor is long, about 6 - 7 miles, so it’ s a big job to tackle. One question is whether it should be (or can be) done all at once, or in parts. Actually, the East Falls Church area is the western terminus, so that’s a part we’re working on now. How to do the rest is also an issue of planning resources. |
1:44 | Michael Perkins: Sure, it’s had a lot of interest here on GGW; I think Joey and I would like to see Streetcars on the corridor. I’m not sure the money and ridership are quiete there. yet. |
1:44 | [Comment From Rob] Some of the most problematic roads in Arlington, from a pedestrian perspective, are VDOT-maintained (to name two near my home, N. 10th St. and Washington Blvd.). Does VDOT grasp the idea and utility of remaking them into “complete streets” that welcome pedestrians and bicyclists? How much utility does the county have to push VDOT towards that goal? |
1:46 | CZ: This is a big, and perennial, issue for us. VDOT has gotten better in recent years. They do now at least have a concept of urban streets. (They even do some traffic calming.) Nonetheless, they are still years behind where we want to be, and even when they are willing to do the right thing, they are very resource-constrained. Guess what gets cut first? |
1:47 | Michael Perkins: going back to Lee Highway, Joey asks about a roundabout proposal at Lee/Glebe. I had never heard of that. |
1:48 | CZ: Don’t recall seeing that one, but our folks have looked at roundabout alternatives in a number of places. Haven’t done any yet. |
1:48 | Michael Perkins: Here’s another comment on planning. |
1:48 | [Comment From Boots] I would like to ask about planning in Arlington, where I live. It seems to me that the county has been good about getting very high density development in some corridors, and maintaining lower density but has had a hard time develoing mid densities. For instance along Wilson Boulevard in Ballston, the north side has 20+ story development, while directly across, the developments remain at 2 stories, or are filled with auto dependent parking lot sprawl. Is there any interest in looking at how to create better mediation between these such as 3-4 story development? |
1:51 | Michael Perkins: Sorry, the question appears to have been cut off. I added the last little part. |
1:51 | CZ: I’m not sure I agree. In some cases the “mediation” exists in the plan, but hasn’t necessarilly been fulfilled, because the reedevelopment isn’t finished. For example, in many locations such as you describe, the auto-type uses (car lots, etc.) are slated for the very kind of development you seek. They just haven’t come in yet. Not surprisingly, the highest value stuff closer to the Metro station gets done first. |
1:53 | CZ: There are quite a number of places, however, where you can see exactly that sort of “in-between” development scaling to the single-family house neighborhoods. For instance, if you walk southwest from the Courthouse station, you’ll see a transition from 13 story buildings (like the one I’m in now), to the Courthouse Hill apartment/townhouse community (and on to the park, etc.). |
1:54 | CZ: Actually, we spend a lot of time thinking about these “edges.” |
1:55 | [Comment From Reggie] My question is about the ongoing battle over widening I-66 inside of the Beltway. I read with interest back in February about your vote to block moving forward on the spot improvements. Could you speak a little bit about your motivations and how you think the congestion in this area might be better addressed? |
1:58 | CZ: The principal issue at TPB in February was the statement by VDOT’s representative that they were not going to do an analysis (the “study” referred to) that was part of the condition originally agreed to when their I66 projects were put on the regional plan by TPB. It was really a question of whether TPB stood for anything at all. That’s why Arlington got so much support. Even folks who support the so-called “spot improvements” agreed that VDOT needed to be held accountable. |
2:00 | CZ: As far as our motivations, Arlington has long, and consistently, maintained that mobility in the I66 corridor is a regional problem, that it must be addressed in a rational way that looks at all the long term issues, and develops strategies that are sustainable over time. We do not think it is rational to spend hundreds of millions of dollars turning a 4-lane traffic jam into a 6-lane traffic jam. |
2:00 | Michael Perkins: I think that’s all the time we have for new questions. I’m just going to ask you a couple. You’re a regular Metrorail and Metrobus rider, right? And are you planning on participating in “Bike to Work Day” festivities on May 15? |
2:02 | CZ: Yes, I ride Metrorail (mostly Orange, Yellow, and Red), Metrobus (especially 16) and ART (especially 41). I almost never miss Bike-to-Work Day. To my great regret, this year it is the same day as the VRE Board meeting, and since I am the Chair this year, I probably can’t skip the meeting. |
2:03 | Michael Perkins: That’s all the time we have. Thanks for being our guest today. Thanks to everyone for submitting comments. David?
|
2:03 | GreaterGreaterWashington: Sorry we couldn’t get to more of the questions. We had a lot! Thanks again for participating. I hope we’ll get to do another chat with you soon. |
2:05 | CZ: Thank you. |
2:05 | GreaterGreaterWashington: Feel free to continue the discussion on Metro, VRE, development in Arlington, or any of the other topics in the comments. |
2:05 |  |
