Level of Effort: 15 minutes, at home in your PJs
Deadline: Fri 11/11 11:59pm

At long last, the Plan Langston Blvd study has released a preliminary concept plan & it's got some great things for sustainable mobility - wider sidewalks, safer crossings, some dedicated bus lanes, protected bike lanes on the majority of Langston Blvd as well as on Harrison Street.

These improvements would make a huge difference and deserve our support.  Our biggest concern is that they are unachievable.  Staff is not proposing any significant lane reductions for cars on these arterial roads, which means any wider sidewalks, new street trees or wider sidewalks will require more land.  The only realistic way to get this additional land is through redevelopment which means these transportation improvements will require significant redevelopment "under the plan" (as opposed to by-right). In response to NIMBY feedback, staff has dramatically decreased the potential building heights available under the plan.  In many areas redeveloping "under the plan" will only get you 1 additional floor of height, while subjecting you to additional requirements (like giving up some land for transportation improvements.  This is an insufficient incentive to redevelop under the plan which will leave these transportation improvements unachievable without expensive and unpopular eminent domain.

The potential heights available under the plan MUST be higher so that we can achieve the important goals of the plan, including transforming the corridor into a walkable, bike-able place where kids can safely walk & bike to parks, schools, and beyond.

Buckle up folks, because this is pretty long survey form.  Our suggested feedback:

  • Higher density of people living, working and playing along Langston Boulevard would support better transit service and better infrastructure for people walking and biking. We recommend supporting more density on the multiple choice questions in the "Land Use, Housing, and Economic Vitality" section. The heights should be higher across the board, but especially in any place currently capped at 5 stories.  In most of these places, 4 stories are achievable by-right.
  • For most streets, improvements should focus on protected bike lanes, shared use paths, & wider sidewalks.
  • For George Mason Drive, we do NOT support the proposed plan (sharrows).  The County needs to do better on George Mason Drive, a primary bicycling corridor that connects to many schools, community centers, and other destinations. Anything short of protected bike lanes or a cycletrack on this street would be inconsistent with the Bicycle Element of the Master Transportation Plan.