A major Maryland State Highway Administration project is underway at the intersection of Wisconsin and Bethesda Avenues. It appears to be related to the effort to improve safety for a street-level crossing of the Capital Crescent Trail, until a replacement tunnel is constructed. The Montgomery County Council, despite having the authority to do so, infamously did not include a provision in the minor master plan amendment related to 7272 Wisconsin Avenue that would require any prospective developer of that site to construct the tunnel.
Now, County taxpayers have to pick up the tab and wait for the Council to make the allocation of funds for tunnel construction. Until that unknown construction date, trail users will be forced to continue crossing at this busy intersection on Wisconsin Avenue. Just one more reason why it's so important to research the candidates, and their developer ties, before voting in the County Council races. A protected bike lane will be added to Bethesda Avenue between here and Woodmont Avenue as part of the temporary crossing plan.
Thanks for the post. It will be interesting to see how well this protected bike lane will work. As i understand it, the bike path will be separated from the pedestrian cross walk and will include dedicated bike crossing signals for cyclists. I talked to a policeman who was controlling traffic at Woodmont and Bethesda, where they are installing the same type of separated and protected bike crossing. He indicated that cameras will be pointed at each bike lane as it approaches a traffic crossing. Once the biker is spotted by the camera, the vehicular traffic signals will insert a bike only cycle, and after a certain period of time, will completely stop all car traffic, including right and left turns, to allow the bikers to safely cross.
ReplyDeleteI’m not sure vehicular drivers will comply, as many don’t fully yield at pedestrian crosswalks. I also wonder how long bikers, wobbling in their clipped in pedals, will wait for their dedicated signal. Most seem to disregard these controls if it impedes their momentum, or forces them to clip out. Some of these types of bike crossings in Scandinavian include “leaning” handrails, so bikers don’t have to clip out while they wait for the bike signal to turn green. The other big question will be on how these lanes impact vehicular traffic signal timing and flow at rush hours. It seems the signal timing will be interrupted at irregular intervals, and could cause some frustrating backups, especially when the CCT is improved east of Bethesda, and will get much more heavily used. I can imagine that on a nice day, a nearly continuous stream of cyclists will be triggering this signal interruption, and could play havoc with motorists, cyclists and the pedestrian caught in the middle.
Hopefully the dedicated tunnel under Wisconsin will get funded and built in a few years, and this will be less of an issue.
The tunnel is under Wisconsin Avenue, MD Route 355, which is a STATE highway, it is not on the property of 7272 Wisconsin Avenue. The old tunnel was taken by the STATE for the Purple Line, which is under the Maryland Department of Transportation. Larry Hogan, Republican, has been governor since two years before construction started, and his nickel-and-diming of the Purple Line project is the reason why a replacement tunnel (and other previously proposed amenities) were not part of the project. Why do you keep trying to blame the developer for the lack of a replacement tunnel on land that they do not own?
ReplyDelete5:13: I don't blame the developer at all. It's the County Council who are to blame. In fact, the minor master plan amendment was written and approved when a completely different developer was considering the property.
ReplyDeleteThe Council had the authority to require any prospective developer to be responsible for the cost and construction of the replacement tunnel. It knowingly declined to do so. 83% of campaign contributions to the Council at that time were from developers. Surely just a coincidence!
This was a County responsibility, not the state's. Hogan was dragged into the Purple Line kicking and screaming, as you know. Hogan's actions have zero to do with the tunnel as the state was never supposed to pay for the tunnel to begin with.
The construction of the new building had nothing to do with the loss of Capital Crescent Trail's ability to use the tunnel. The tunnel was taken for construction of the Purple Line tracks and station, NOT for construction of the building.
ReplyDeleteThe Purple Line is not a county project. It is a state project, serving two counties - Prince George's County as well as Montgomery County.
MD 355 is a state highway, not a county highway.
From where does your notion that "the state was never supposed to pay for the tunnel" come? Why should the developer alone be required to pay for the new tunnel? This hardly seems fair.
4:46: The whole point of the minor master plan amendment was to both facilitate the Purple Line, while also exchanging greater height and density in exchange for public benefits that would be delivered by the prospective developer of 7272 Wisconsin.
ReplyDeleteAllowing greater profit for the developer than was allowed under the zoning at that time most certainly justified obtaining public benefits from the project. The Council actively chose not to burden the future developer with the cost and hassle of the tunnel project - a stunning act of intentional negligence in that context.
355 isn't being touched in any way - the tunnel runs underneath it! The Purple Line was driven from the beginning by developer-controlled elected officials in Montgomery and Prince George's counties - Hogan was on the verge of killing the project in 2015, if you recall.
I don’t think it’s entirely fair to say the master plan amendment was intended to increase the density primarily to allow greater profit for the developer. It was widely reported that the minor masterplan amendment was required to make the project feasible, and otherwise would not have been constructed. The minor master plan allowed the new station to be constructed in a newly created space that allows a non-curving platform, avoiding gaps during boarding and alighting, as well as more clearance around revised column locations.
ReplyDeleteThe developer was required to build the CCT tunnel under their portion of the new buildings, as well as building the enclosure for a new two-story high bike parking garage. Both of these are massively expensive community benefits that the developer agreed to build and pay for. The developer was also required to build the massive new area for the Purple Line station as well. Of course these large spaces reduce their useable underground site area by a large extent, mitigated by allowing 40’ more of building height, need for the above ground portion of their parking decks.
I am quite amazed at the scale of this caper and the cost of the land. I believe they paid $110M for the property, and before they could build anything that they could make a profit on, they had to demo a huge building, build the structure around the station, a large mechanical shaft, the CCT tunnel and the bike parking deck. I bet they spent at least $20M to construct all of these elements, bringing their initial land cost to about $130M, for slightly more than an acre of land. That’s similar to NYC land cost!
Of course the county could have asked for more, but I suspect they felt that asking the developer to pay for off site improvements, like the CCT tunnel under Wisconsin, would have killed the deal.
I still wonder if having both a CCT surface route and a CCT tunnel route are redundant. In many ways, it seems that a safe bike crossing of Woodmont Avenue, Bethesda Avenue and Wisconsin Avenue will be achievable with the surface route alone. Many folks don’t realize the the tunnel route, as planned will create a long and steep grade to meet up with the CCT at Elm Street Park. Many novice cyclists will find this grade too steep, and be forced to dismount and walk their bike up the incline. Heading west, the steep descent will create a raceway for cyclists, to pick up speed, and passing wobbling cyclists trying to go east. This could cause some serious accidents in an isolated area.
Of course it’s nice to have as much grade separation as possible for safety, but I believe that many cyclists will not be just passing through Bethesda, but will be making it their destination. Having cyclists travel down Bethesda Avenue, across Wisconsin at grade, and down Willow and 47th Streets allows them to add to the vitality of nearby retailers along the separated bike path.
It seems that folks have fallen in love with the former tunnel under Wisconsin, and seem to want it back at any cost, even if it no longer makes very much sense. Perhaps once the CCT surface route is open and functioning, this might become more obvious.
"The Council actively chose not to burden the future developer with the cost and hassle of the tunnel project - a stunning act of intentional negligence in that context."
ReplyDeleteUmmm pretty sure the developer actually did have to build a tunnel under their building, as well as enough space for a station. In fact, because of the station, nearly all of the parking is above ground.
8:46: The tunnel has to go all the way to the other side of the Air Rights Building, and that is the larger part the Council is now forcing taxpayers to pick up the tab for. Corporate welfare for campaign donors.
ReplyDeleteYou seem stuck on this notion that the taking of the Capital Crescent Trail Tunnel under MD 355 somehow relates only to this one entity - the developer of 7272 Wisconsin. In fact, it doesn't relate to them at all, any more than the Purple Line bridge over Connecticut Avenue, or the Purple Line underpass under Jones Bridge Road. The Purple Line is being built for the benefit of the people of Montgomery and Prince George's County by the State of Maryland. Why is this single stakeholder responsible for 100% of the bill for replacing the Capital Crescent Trail tunnel, in your opinion?
ReplyDeleteSo you don't agree with my comments above on how the project likely wouldn't have been built if the developer also had to fund and construct the CCT tunnel under Wisconsin? I didn't mention that the tunnel also needs to extend the whole length of Elm Street, and surface up a steep grade to daylight at Elm Street Park. Thats way more tunnel than just under Wisconsin. This extra length of tunnel land the steep grade is required because of existing businesses on Elm that can't be cut off by a shorter tunnel, and the fact that the CCT has to rise up steeply to pass over the Purple Line tracks to access the eastbound CCT on the north side of the tracks.
ReplyDeleteI really don't think this is in any way because of corporate welfare or pandering to elected officials. Perhaps some poor planning, notification and budgeting of a design problem that should have been anticipated. What do you think of my comment about whether we really need the tunnel route, if the surface route can be safely built?
12:32: I think you have to revisit the context of the minor master plan amendment - and that this has absolutely nothing to do with the current developer, Carr Properties.
ReplyDeleteThe entire genesis of the MMPA was due to a different developer's interest in the 7272 Wisconsin property. The idea of a "better Purple Line station" was ginned up as a PR reason to allow redevelopment of the property beyond what the zoning allowed at that time.
The legality of the MMPA process has been heavily disputed, but never tested in court. Every single time it has been used, it has been to help a developer that wants to do something that can't be done, and other nearby properties are included in the MMPA process as a legal fig leaf to ostensibly hide the favor being done by the Council.
No one had ever proposed demolishing the Apex Building during all the years of planning for the Purple Line. This was an idea cooked up to help a different developer prior to Carr.
In that context, the Council's responsibility was to get public benefits in exchange for the developer's profit benefit. The Council actively chose not to extract those benefits - including not requiring a replacement cineplex, which will negatively impact downtown Bethesda for decades.
3:15: Certainly, the tunnel would have cost less if it was required to be part of the 7272 Wisconsin mega project. You wouldn't be bringing in a whole separate contract process and contractor. The only reason it might not be as profitable now, is that developers have overestimated the demand for luxury apartments at $2000+ rent. As it is, Carr sought and received approval to convert a sizable number of units to hotel use. In this, they were commendably being open about something happening quietly at all of the new buildings downtown: With little demand for these apartments, many are being used as airbnb hotel units, student dorms, and extended-stay contract housing.
I think the tunnel is necessary to encourage biking as a commuter option. If we only had the surface route, it would take much longer for cyclists to traverse the area.
One of my points was that the CCT will probably serve many more people as a pathway to get to and from Bethesda as a destination, and not just the fastest way to bypass the area. I bet most folks traveling along the CCT will likely stop somewhere in downtown, and therefore might be less likely to use the tunnel, and prefer to check out the shops, cafes and restaurant, soon to be accessed by an extensive network of protected two-way, bike;Ames that are separated from traffic. Of course some serious bike commuters will want the fastest way to and from work, but from my observation of the proposed tunnel design, I don’t think most casual cyclists will like the long and steep uphill grades, and the adjacency to very fast downhill cyclists.
ReplyDelete