DC Streetcar westbound on H Street by airbus777 licensed under Creative Commons.

In the summer of 2020, several councilmembers led an effort to defund the streetcar extension to the Benning Road Metro Station in Ward 7. In doing so, they made several statements on the record about the project and Ward 7.

At-large Councilmember Elissa Silverman, for example, claimed the positive impacts to Ward 7 from the streetcar would never materialize because the potential for economic development was low in Ward 7 due to various legacies of redlining. In an email response to a request for additional comment, she added that most of the nearby land is “not developable in the foreseeable future,” saying that “the main point of streetcars, as opposed to bus transit, is to drive development along the streetcar line itself” (Other councilmembers that voted yes last year to an amendment to move some funding from the streetcar budget to help bolster affordable housing efforts include Robert White, Brooke Pinto, Trayon White, and Brianne Nadeau ).

Not only are those comments inaccurate, they also ignore the tens of thousands of Ward 7 residents who stand to benefit from the streetcar extension, and ignore the transportation equity arguments made by many ward 7 residents.

I conducted a brief analysis of the extension’s walk-shed to dispel the misinformation and demonstrate how many Ward 7 residents will benefit from the extension.

The streetcar extension will be within walking distance of up to 37,000 ward 7 residents.

It’s likely that thousands of Ward 7 residents would ride the streetcar daily, as many of them have no transfer-free ride to the jobs and amenities that H Street offers. And, most importantly, the Streetcar study area has one of the highest percentages of zero-car households in the District.

Using registered voters as a proxy, the map below displays that there are 12,000 residents within a 10-minute walk, 21,000 residents within a 15-minute walk, and 37,000 residents within a 20-minute walk of one of the planned streetcar stops.

Calling it a streetcar to “nowhere,” as the Post editorial board did in 2015, is a bit insulting given that 37,000 residents call the Benning corridor home.

Created by the author using QGIS, Open Street Maps, Open Data DC, and TravelTime API.

A random sample survey I conducted in September 2020 showed that approximately 14% of Ward 7 residents will use the streetcar every day and an additional 19% would use it every week.

Applied to the 80,000-person population of Ward 7, those percentages equate to about 11,200 Ward 7 residents using it every day and an additional 15,200 using it at some point during the week.

Additionally, DDOT forecasts that roughly 15,000 peoplewill use the streetcar extension every day, corroborating my survey-based estimates.

So, on a daily basis somewhere between 11,200 and 15,000 Ward 7 residents will use the streetcar every day, and there are a total of 37,000 Ward 7 residents within a cognizable walking distance who may use it intermittently. And, as many ward 7 voices have pointed out, those east-west transit capacities are exactly why the streetcar’s primary purpose is transportation equity, not economic development – although economic development can indeed be a secondary benefit.

Economic development opportunity in Ward 7

In addition to the 37,000 residents within a reasonable walking distance, there are numerous economic developments, environmental amenities, and government agencies to be located near the future streetcar.

So, when Councilmember Silverman rhetorically asks “what benefits will there really be to Ward 7,” I think it’s fair to say: a lot!

Councilmember Silverman has argued in the past that I-295, PEPCO, and the Whitlock bridge would be immutable obstacles to any economic development that the streetcar could support – which is ironic given that part of the Benning Road Reconstruction and Streetcar Project’s scope is to remediate some of those very same legacies of redlining.

Silverman added this via email: “There are clearly places that could use public support for development along the planned route, like the stretch south of the Pepco plant, but the vast majority of the route is not developable in the next few decades, or would create significant displacement. If the goal is equitable economic development, there are better ways of doing it than the streetcar.”

However, currently there are at least five major mixed-use developments slated within a 10-minute walk of the new streetcar route – some of them precisely where the councilmember claims development is not possible. The table below summarizes all of the walk-shed data.

Image by the author.

At least two of these developments explicitly reference the streetcar supporting their vision and the viability of their plans. Two developments cite the streetcar as an incentive.

The first is the Fletcher-Johnson project, a community-driven mixed-use redevelopment of a former school on Benning Road Southeast. The location is the fourth largest site owned by the District. Redevelopment is being led by the Fletcher-Johnson Task Force (FJTF), which is a community-based organization of several dozen Ward 7 residents.

Unlike many developments that occur in the District, the Fletcher-Johnson plan is putting the community first. The Fletcher-Johnson Task Force actively articulates and advocates the community’s needs to the developer, Gragg Cardona Partners. These plans include a new grocery store, an adult education center for technical and continuing education, new housing, and a full-service restaurant.

The Fletcher-Johnson Task Force planning documents also reference the streetcar as a selling point for the development. Keith Hasan-Towery, the chair of the Fletcher-Johnson Task Force, said that “everyone is telling us that if we want to attract quality retail and other amenities, then we have to increase foot traffic to the site. The streetcar is another vehicle to accomplish this.”

Northwest of the Fletcher-Johnson site, a $600 million (not a typo) development proposed by Cedar Realty Trust, Goldman Sachs, and Asland Capital Partners at Minnesota Avenue and Benning Road also aims to serve the community’s needs. Chief among their plans is a much-needed grocery store. Like the Fletcher Johnson Task Force, Cedar Realty cites the streetcar as a transit incentive located near the development. Commissioner Tyrell Holcomb — who represents the SMD containing the Cedar Realty development — recently fully endorsed the development, saying the planned development “represents real equity” for Ward 7.

Both of the concrete, and very large, planned developments described above are to be located where the councilmember believes development isn’t possible. And, as the FJTF planning documents show, and as Commissioner Holcomb stated clearly last week, both of the developments represent equitable economic development that is embraced by existing residents.

An 11th hour red herring named BRT?

Silverman argued via email that Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) is a preferable alternative to streetcars. She said the streetcar extension would cost $200 million, less cost-effective than BRT.

“With that money, we could triple bus transit in the Benning Road area, provide tax abatements for potential development along the route, and still have enough left over to build significant amounts of affordable housing there,” Silverman added.

But Silverman’s perspective that the money could easily be reallocated to other projects isn’t supported by fact. First, the $200 million she referenced is not the cost of the streetcar extension — $200 million dollars is approximately the total cost of the entire Benning Road Reconstruction and Streetcar Project which includes massive safety, roadway, bridge, pedestrian, and bicycle improvements. In fact, most of the dollars for the Benning Road Reconstruction and Streetcar Project are going towards the non-streetcar elements of the project.

Second, the lion’s share of the funds referenced are in fact federally sourced dollars specifically for the Benning Road Reconstruction and Streetcar Project as planned by DDOT. The federal funds are earmarked for the specific plans spelled out in the Final Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact, both of which were recently approved with the streetcar at the center of their plans.

Finally, although there may be some genuine merits to BRT, the suggestions made by the councilmember ignore the current policy alternatives in front of us. There is no concrete, practical, or politically expedient BRT proposal in front of us – but there is a concrete and practical streetcar proposal in front of us that is two decades in the making, and which has a great weight of support from Ward 7 residents.

It’s unrealistic to suggest that DDOT can suddenly and seamlessly switch to BRT without many, many, more years of delays for Ward 7, very high costs associated with demolishing the existing streetcar infrastructure on H street, and a very real risk of losing roughly $100 million in federal matching money. Quite frankly, the BRT suggestion raises more questions than it answers.

As DDOT moves towards the construction phase of the streetcar extension, I ask that those critical of the streetcar ensure they have at least taken the time to realize how many people east of the Anacostia River could benefit from it.

And I would please ask that DC leaders avoid recycling the same old tired and incorrect criticisms of the streetcar.

Michael Havlin is a Ward 7 resident and a member of the Ward 7 Friends of the DC Streetcar. In his free time Michael likes to work with data of all kinds (big and small) to help inform public policy and discourse.