F.C. Can Increase Economic Activity & Reduce Traffic
In his letter last week Stan King is right to point out that as we consider new development projects in Falls Church, we need to consider the economic, environmental and quality of life impacts.
Lumped into these evaluations of impacts are understandable concerns about increased traffic and more vehicles on the roadways. Additional growth, the sentiment goes, equates to more cars and more traffic.
Here’s the thing: it’s not really true anymore.
Data from the Virginia Department of Transportation shows that since 2007, the number of cars on many of Falls Church’s roads actually declined. This includes Washington Street south of Broad, near Pearson Square. Also Hillwood past Whittier Park. Other routes saw no change, like Broad Street past the Spectrum, Byron, and Broadway.
How can this be with more residents and a big boost in commercial activity?
For part of the answer, look at the Rosslyn-Ballston corridor. It might be hard to believe but there are fewer vehicles traversing most stretches of Wilson and Clarendon Boulevards today than there were in 1996. That includes the Virginia Square and Clarendon neighborhoods that experienced significant business and residential growth over the past two decades.
The upshot is that it is precisely because of the carefully considered and aligned development that traffic goes down. With more choices, travel options, and things in close proximity nearby residents can drive less and “chain” trips together. The added benefit is that when roads actually serve communities—as opposed to serving drivers to speed through them—traffic problems get better.
Now, Falls Church is a tiny city and we are affected by a lot of what goes on outside our borders. But we do know that we can support increased economic activity while reducing reliance on auto travel. That’s an important consideration and a new growth model for the future. Fortunately, Falls Church is finding itself uniquely positioned.
Why Should ‘Richmond’ Pay More to F.C.?
I am curious as to why Falls Church is hoping that “Richmond will accept a greater burden for funding the Virginia Retirement System (VRS)” Do the council members of the various counties realize that “Richmond” is nothing more than the sum of every county in Virginia? Where do they think that “Richmond” gets its money from?
According to the U.S. Census web site the median household income for Falls Church is nearly double that of the rest of the state ($120k vs. $63k). Isn’t it time that the wealthy paid to help those less fortunate? I’m pretty sure that most of the residents voted in this last election for candidates who tossed around phrases like “economic justice” and “fair share”. It’s time to show your true colors, Falls Church – pay up or shut up.
LaPierre, Norquist Are True ‘Enemies of the People’
Do you remember the words written by Paddy Chayefsky and spoken by newsman Howard Beale in the movie “Network”? “I’m as mad as hell, and I’m not going to take it anymore!” Well I for one say, “Enough!”
I am not advocating the repeal of the second amendment, however the extremes to which it has been interpreted have long since crossed the line of acceptability. I don’t think that private citizens who possess assault weapons are part of any well regulated militia.
The LaPierres and Norquists hold our law makers hostage with their political threats, and are the true ‘Enemies of the People’, the American people.
They create fear and paranoia to put a lock on their own personal gains and power.
As for the remarks by Governor McDonnell, I couldn’t agree more with David Snyder’s reaction which goes beyond party affiliation. But the real culprits however might just be the electorate that puts these “neanderthals” in office. Let us think (the operative word here being, THINK) hard about our choice for the next governor in the coming year and our representatives a year later. Our obligation is to move forward and not retreat into a Wild West mentality. Surely we owe this to the future generations.
Paul M. Levy
via the internet
Letters to the Editor may be submitted to email@example.com or via our online form here. Letters should be limited to 350 words and may be edited for content, clarity and length. To view the FCNP’s letter and submission policy, please click here.