2. PREFERENCES OF MONTGOMERY COUNTY COMMUTERS Although presently only 11 percent of Montgomery County commuters to downtown Washington travel all of the way by public transit, a detailed study, by the General Services Administration, in 1961, found that this ratio would increase to 33 percent with merely the provision of convenient express bus service and free transfers. The willingness of almost one-fourth of Montgomery County auto commuters to switch to bus under these circumstances was significantly higher than auto commuters from Fairfax County and Falls Church and only slightly less than Alexandria, Arlington, and Prince Georges County commuters to downtown Washington. This analysis did not examine commuter views on rapid transit or express buses on reserved highway lanes. A more comprehensive study, undertaken within the past year by National Analysts, Inc., found overwhelming support among all Washington area commuters for rapid transit. Although only one-third of all surveyed commuters use transit, and two-thirds use automobiles, this survey found, actually, preferences to be just the opposite: that two-thirds of all commuters preferred that public transportation investment be for an efficient rapid transit system rather than a new system of good highways for getting to town and back (including more in-town parking). Montgomery County commuters were no exception to this view. Of all commuters, 64.9 percent preferred rapid transit to improved highways; of Montgomery County commuters only, 63.5 percent preferred rapid transit to improved highways. Asked what type of rapid transit vehicle they would prefer, 61.4 percent of all commuters preferred rail vehicles, only 22.3 percent bus, with 16.3 percent indicating no preference. To carry this test of rapid transit preference against other alternatives to the extreme, a question was asked which confronted commuters with a choice among five specific alternatives: (1) more and better bus service; (2) a rapid transit system; (3) express buses on reserved lanes; (4) commuter trains; (5) a better system of highways, expressways, and parking. The specific question asked was the following: “Recognizing that improvements to both highways and transit systems are needed, from your point of view, which one of the following ought to receive the major emphasis; which one should receive the second most emphasis; which one should receive the third most emphasis?" The first preferences for all commuters, and for Montgomery County commuters only, were as follows: No other local jurisdiction expressed such a high preference for rapid transit as did Montgomery County. No other jurisdiction (except the District of Columbia) gave such a low rating to improved highways. (Only 13.9 percent of District commuters preferred a better system of highways and parking.) Although 66 percent of the commuters polled used automobiles for commuting, this survey found that only 9 percent of the total were "hard core" auto commuters who would probably not use transit under any circumstances. It found the total potential for rapid transit to be 90 percent of all commuters, meaning that at least five of every six auto commuters were potential rapid transit users.i A similar study of 1,395 Washington area auto commuters by Fortune in 1957 found that 6 out of every 10 would switch to rapid transit if travel time equaled their driving time. 3. ATTITUDES OF COMMUTERS ELSEWHERE The results of these Montgomery County studies are by no means unique. Studies in other high-income suburban areas, presently having rapid transit, find a marked preference for rapid transit commuting over the automobile to the central city. Washington is the fourth-ranking city in the United States in terms of downtown employment. It is the only one of the five largest employment centers without rapid transit today. The relative use of automobiles and transit in these five cities in 1955-58 was as follows: Mode of peak-hour travel to downtown 5 cities having largest downtown employment [In percent] Studies in each of the other four cities having rapid transit systems show that high-income commuters prefer to leave their cars at home. Thus, a study of New York's rapid transit commuters from high-income suburban areas (such as Westchester County and Long Island) found that 80 percent of the riders were executive, managerial, professional, and white collar-workers, that 96 percent of them owned cars (30 percent owned two or more), that their average income was $16,658, that over 70 percent of them were homeowners and that the average values of their homes was $30,000. 4. FUTURE FORECASTS The NCTA's proposed transportation system for the area for 1980 assumed that, with rapid transit, the percentage of peak-hour trips to central Washington (sector zero) by auto would decline from 57 percent to 40 percent. This finding is extremely conservative, contemplating that only 3 of every 10 auto commuters would switch to transit. Studies in depth of Washington area commuter attitudes, as well as the experience of other cities with older, less convenient rapid transit systems, suggest that in actual practice the switch from auto to transit commuting would be substantially higher. Nevertheless, with only 60 percent of downtown's rush-hour commuters using transit in 1977 the NCTA found that a 15-percent increase in rush-hour person trips destined for central Washington would be accompanied by almost a 20percent decline in the number of automobiles destined for the same area. Two of the proposed rail rapid transit lines would connect Montgomery County with the District. In addition, the NCTA also recommended two new arterial highways entering the District from Montgomery County. 1. A six-lane freeway (70-S) along the B. & O. Railroad right-of-way, providing improved highway access for central and eastern Montgomery County; and 2. A six-lane parkway (George Washington Memorial Parkway) along the Potomac River, providing improved highway access from central and western Montgomery County. (North of the proposed junction with Little Falls Parkway, the parkway would be four lanes in width.) The NCTA found no need for any other new arterial highways between Montgomery County and the District, either in the form of new freeways (whether Wisconsin Avenue corridor or parallel to the proposed George Washington Memorial Parkway or through Rock Creek Park) or through extensive street widening. To the contrary, it found that with the three basic service improvements of (1) two rail transit lines, (2) the two new 6-lane limited access highways it proposed and (3) completion of the Capital Beltway, the peak-hour motor vehicle traffic on existing arterial highways from Montgomery County to the District would decline by 25 percent to 12,600, the lowest since the early 1950's: Peak-hour inbound motor vehicles from Montgomery County to the District and Virginia, 1925-77 Two general criticisms have been leveled against the NCTA's planning forecasts: (1) The NCTA has underestimated future highway needs; (2) The NCTA has overstated probable future rapid transit use. Both claims seem patently erroneous. If any error or "bias" is involved in the NCTA's planning forecasts, it is that the NCTA (1) has overstated future peakhour demand and (2) has understated the attractiveness of rapid transit. result, future highway demand from Montgomery County to the District appears to be overstated. As a Implicit in the NCTA's 1977 peak-hour traffic forecasts is that the number of peak-hour riders from Montgomery County to the District and Virginia will increase from 28,000 in 1962 to about 53,000 in 1977. This is an annual growth of 1,667 peak-hour riders per year. Such a growth is hardly in prospect within the next 15 years. Consistently over the past several decades the annual growth in peak-hour travel from Montgomery County to and through the District has been only 650 to 700 person trips per year. If any change in this trend is discernible in recent years, it is downward. (From 1959 to 1962 the average growth was less than 300 peak-hour person trips per year.) At the same time, the NCTA seems unduly conservative in its planning forecasts as to the willingness of Montgomery County commuters to patronize rapid transit. Independent studies show that rapid rail transit would receive overwhelming acceptance among the county's commuters. From the point of view of the commuters themselves, over 80 percent would prefer that the major emphasis be on improved transit rather than improved highways and parking, with rapid rail transit a 3-to-1 favorite over all alternative forms of improved public transit. The NCTA, however, has assumed that only about 30 percent of Montgomery County commuters would use the proposed rapid transit system. Even if the annual growth in peak-hour travel from Montgomery County to the District and Virginia were to be 1,000 per year from 1962 to 1977 (50 percent greater than past experience) and even if only 40 percent of the 1977 commuters used transit (a not unattainable goal in a city with Washington's concentration of downtown employment), the 1977 peak-hour transit riders from Montgomery County would be 1,000 more than the NCTA used in its planning forecast and the corresponding number of auto commuters would be at least 10,000 less. Converted into terms of peak-hour highway demands, this would represent about 19,500 motor vehicles from Montgomery County to the District and Virginia in 1977 compared with 16,756 in 1962. If, as the NCTA finds, 20 percent of these vehicles would be Virginia-bound traffic using Cabin John Bridge, the number of motor vehicles crossing into the District at the peak hour would be only 15,600 motor vehicles, substantially less than today. 1 App. V of the NCTA's report shows 16,350 peak-hour transit riders from Montgomery County to and through the District in 1977. The 27.200 motor vehicles from Montgomery County to the District and Virginia in the same year imply about 36,500 peak-hour auto riders. 6. LAND USE FOR TRANSPORTATION An often-overlooked reality-until the highway planners start threatening a Based upon the optimum carrying capacity of various modes of transportation, In addition, in the case of automobiles, consideration must be given to the For Montgomery County commuters living 20 miles from their office in down- Peak-hour motor vehicles from Montgomery County to District of Columbia 1 Capacity reduced due to construction; temporarily increased pressures on other nearby arterials. Source: District of Columbia Highway Department, District of Columbia line cordon check. ALEXANDRIA, VA., November 1, 1963. Hon. BASIL L. WHITENER, House of Representatives, DEAR MR. WHITENER: Although it seems doubtful whether any area. As a professional engineer I have lived or worked in many of our larger cities for the past 30 years and have had ample opportunity to use and compare their public transportation systems. I know of no other place, either in the United States or abroad, where public officials and transit company executives are allowed to so shamelessly and systematically sacrifice the public welfare as in the Washington Virtually none of them gives a damn about the public welfare of those who still use public transportation, and there is even less interest in the reasons why the majority of citizens can not, or will not, use it. It seems obvious that neither your plan nor any other plan, regardless of merit and public need, has any chance for satisfactory and profitable operations unless a long-overdue effort is made. to retain the present transit patrons and attract new ones. There are many things that could and should be done to eliminate or greatly reduce the extraordinary amount of needless transfers and other delays and unpleasantness; and most of it could be done without any increased cost to the transit companies and their patrons. If your subcommittee would invite the general public (individuals) to submit written comments on their transportation needs and their objections to present practices, you no doubt would get a lot of impractical or screwball answers: But you also would receive a wealth of information which competent analysts could process into a meaningful guidance program. For example, the jobs in Virginia, just within sight of Memorial Bridge, are roughly equivalent to a city of about one-quarter million persons, yet it still is impossible for anyone from Maryland or Washington to even reach the Pentagon by direct service, much less by express. Only fools or the most impoverished persons will use a public transportation system which compels them to stand at needless transfer points, endlessly waiting in the rain and cold for a chance to jam aboard crowded buses; always at the mercy of two or more greedy and irresponsible transit companies and two or more even greedier and even more irresponsible unions. Unless Congress starts using its big clubs, things will get even worse insofar as patronage loss is concerned, judging from the way the Federal Government is building some of its buildings, and signing long-term rental leases on huge, privately owned buildings, in areas where no kind of public transportation system can ever provide effective service. When Roy Chalk recently implied that your proposed scaled-down plan wasn't worth a damn, he accomplished nothing more than to again underscore the arrogant indifference or incompetence he has constantly demonstrated toward the public responsibilities entrusted to his stewardship. Cordially, HARALD J. SUNDSTROM. WASHINGTON PLANNING & HOUSING ASSOCIATION, INC. Hon. JOHN L. MCMILLAN, WASHINGTON, D.C., November 6, 1963. Chairman, Committee on the District of Columbia, U.S. House of Representatives, Washington, D.C. MY DEAR MR. MCMILLAN: The Washington Planning & Housing Association wishes to go on record in support of H.R. 8929, a bill |