TheWashCycle

Thursday Evening Commute - Girls Gone Broke

Good evening

• Union Station Plaza is complete. Construction included a block of bike lanes and a section of the MBT of a length shorter than Marquis Goodwin can jump. Still, that's progress.
• There were 126,398 CaBi trips and 135,458 miles traveled in January 2013. The number of trips increased by 2% from December 2012.
• LAB helps fund WABA's Women and Bicycles initiative.
• The Post has a lenghty piece on the future of professional cycling. I haven't read it yet.
• Some advocates think a bike fee may make sense. I would argue that cyclists already pay a sales tax on all their bicycle, accessory and service purchases. And sales taxes go to paying for infrastructure. So cyclists already pay a bike fee. The question is, should they pay a larger one.
• At this link, check out the photo of the "Rough Riding Contest" at Meridian Hill in 1895. It's a bunch of cyclists on penny farthings. I think I see the next Dandies and Quaintrelles ride theme. Seriously, I want to know more about this, and does anyone know where the actual photo can be found?
• Maryland's bicycle symposium coverage.
• Rockingham County, VA could get a county-wide bicycle and pedestrian plan.
• It's funny I was just in a conversation yesterday about this issue (in advance of the Bike Summit). At AASHTO’s annual Washington conference, DOT Secretary Ray Lahood said that U.S. DOT was getting into the business of issuing its own design standards, instead of simply accepting the AASHTO guidelines. "Cycling advocates have long criticized the AASHTO guide, and the FHWA’s adherence to it, since even the most recent version doesn’t incorporate the latest thinking in bicycle and pedestrian safety treatments." They will still work with AASHTO, but they should also get more input from NACTO which has it's own set of standards (Which CaBi GM Eric Gilliland helped develop). This has the potential to be an enormous win for cyclists and cycling.   
• "Hell on wheels" + Pope
• This bridge would be the coolest. We could do the same thing on the Bay Bridge.

 

Examiner declares War on Solutions

New Washington Examiner DC Government reporter  Eric P. Newcomer hits the ground driving with a story about DC's "war on cars."

Driving in the District is a high-price hassle: burning gasoline while stuck in traffic, feeding hungry parking meters and now tracking the ever-watchful traffic cameras waiting to make you pay up if you slip up.

I know. What's with all the enforcement right? They act like speeding's illegal or deadly or something. In trying to keep me from killing people, they're killing my buzz, and isn't that a crime too? 

If it seems like city leaders want to get cars off the road in the nation's capital, that's because they do.

Newsflash. So does everyone else. Everyone wants to reduce congestion and pollution from the smallest town to the U.N [Oh no Agenda 21!]. Has it occurred to you that you wouldn't be "burning gasoline while stuck in traffic" if there were fewer cars on the road. "I want a solution to congestion, but it better not involve less traffic!"

Newcomer mistakes DC's goal to create "a city where residents and visitors won't need a car" with a war on cars. DC is interested in giving drivers other options. Only in car-happy America would that be a "war on cars." It reminds me a bit of the line from the film Jacob's Ladder.

So, if you're frightened of dying and... you're holding on, you'll see devils tearing your life away. But if you've made your peace, then the devils are really angels, freeing you from the earth.

If you want to hang on to your car and driving, then you see a war on cars; but if you drive because there is no better option, you see a city trying to help you live a life with more choices.

And yes, the city wants to raise the cost of parking and even driving to reduce congestion and improve parking availability.

"One of the ways to manage a scarce resource is to use price as a signal," she said.

Gosh that sounds a lot like economics. As does this

Facing scarce parking, commuters could pay even more for new "performance-based" parking spaces with prices that fluctuate with demand

Isn't that how things should be? You always hear people saying "If I ran my business like the government I'd be bankrupt" or something, but once government does run things like a business, well that's just greed. 

"Zero tolerance" anti-idling zones could bring in new revenue to the city when drivers are caught with engines running at a standstill.

And 100% tolerance anti-idling zones would cause pollution, traffic congestion and illegal behavior. I know which one I choose. If Newcomer thinks the law is bad, then he should say so, but asking for less enforcement of a law you support just doesn't make sense. How much tolerance should we have on this?

"Motorists are seen as the ATM machines of the District of Columbia, but they're the unwelcome ATM machines," said Lon Anderson, AAA Mid-Atlantic's managing director of government and public affairs.

First of all, the M in ATM stands for machine. So saying ATM machine is saying Automatic Teller Machine Machine. Second, an ATM gives you your money, not someone elses, so it's a bad analogy. Third, motorists are seen as customers in our city, and as customers they have to pay for the services they use (mostly parking). Some motorists are also seen as law-breakers on account of them breaking the law, so they're being fined. Again, how much enforcement of a law you support is the right amount?

Already, the city has found ways to make large sums of money off motorists

I suspect that if you added up all the revenue from motorists and all the costs, that DC would still be losing money on motorists. He throws up a bunch of numbers for how much DC brings in on parking and violations (and then double counts some of it by mentioning unpaid tickets, fines and fees - which isn't actually money DC has made). Most of the money comes from violations. So this isn't a war on cars, it's aw enforcement. Is enforcing good laws bad?

Those who are able to afford driving in the District might find it more difficult to find a place to park: The city is weighing making the creation of parking spaces optional for developers in some downtown areas.

I don't want to have to pay for parking, someone else should do that. Why isn't a parking minimum a "war on business owners" or a "war on homeowners," since it makes owning a business or home more expensive?

Some Adams Morgan residents are upset over a new development because the city might let the builder get away with providing seven fewer parking spaces than typically required.

"Parking is incredibly difficult anywhere in Adams Morgan," said Mindy Moretti, a former advisory neighborhood commissioner.

Wow. She does sound upset. The way that she stated a fact and all. I guess I'll just take your word for it that some are upset. Some people are always upset about something. 

Under the mayor's Sustainable D.C. plan, the city wants 50 percent of commutes by its residents to take place on public transportation and another 25 percent by bike.

The American Community Survey found that, in 2011, just 3.15 percent of D.C. residents typically biked to work

25% does sound like a lot then. Unfortunately for Newcomer and his crack team of editors, 25% is the precentage goal for those who commute by bike AND walking. Most of that will probably be walking as is true now (10%), so that's a pretty big flaw. 

Bike lanes -- D.C. has about 56 miles of them -- are popping up around the city, which often means less room on the road for cars.

Actually it rarely means less room for cars. Usually no lanes or parking is removed. But so what if it is? Is there really no space on the roads for bike lanes? [Newcomer makes this bit of research a two-fer, by the way, as he has a second article that came out at the same time about how DC has invested, and plans to continue to invest, in bike lanes and green lanes.]

Even the photo that accompanies the story is flawed. It shows a cherry-picked moment when there is a line of cars but no bikes. But it shows a spot where the number of traffic lanes is exactly the same as it was before the bike lanes went in. The space on the left is a turn lane for cars. And adding to that, we can see that after the intersection, the road is pretty clear. This isn't a photo of traffic congestion; it's a shot of cars stopped at a traffic light. 

So let's see, Newcomer seems to be asking for

1. No congestion

2. No parking fees

3. No traffic enforcement

4. No congestion fee - which is pretty much the only proven way to reduce congestion

5. Heavily regulated parking policy for buildings

In other words, an impossible - and irresponsible - laundry list of items to provide.

Thursday Morning Commute - Roy Scheider is the only Seaquester I care about

I hope you're all enjoying the last day of large, bloated government.

• ANC2b to take up a resolution supporting the “Bicycle Safety Amendment Act of 2013”
• Sadie Dingfelder of the City Paper was hit by a car while on (walking?) her bike. "A few days ago, an off-duty police officer ran a red light near Union Station and then changed his mind, backing his car over me and my bike while I was in a crosswalk. "
• How much flexibility will Richmond give NoVa in deciding how to spend the new transportation funds? "Will Richmond let Northern Virginia spend as much as it would like on mass transit, busways and bike lanes rather than pouring concrete? (The answer could depend on whether Ken Cuccinelli wins the governorship in November. A longtime transit skeptic, he opposed building Metro’s Silver Line to Dulles Airport.)...A tug of war also is likely between auto-friendly projects and those favoring rail transit, buses, bicycles and pedestrians. Arlington, in particular, has a long (and successful) history of promoting alternatives to cars. It hopes Richmond grants it lots of flexibility in parceling out money."
• (Warning: Ann Coulter link!) "I don't know why anyone needs to bicycle in a city." Only one reason: to trade your food stamps for weed with your illegal immigrant budies before an occupy wallstreet gay marriage. Or, I suppose, to go to work.

MD Outdoor Recreation Public Input Meeting March 6th

The East Coast Greenway writes:

The Maryland Department of Natural Resources (DNR) is asking citizens for their input on State outdoor recreation facilities and services throughout Maryland. They are holding a public input meeting on March 6th, 6 to 8 PM at the Howard County Robinson Nature Center, 6692 Cedar Lane, in Columbia, MD.

This is the first step in a statewide effort to enhance existing recreation areas in Maryland, including State parks, forests, wildlife areas and trails. DNR will ask participants to assess the extent to which existing facilities meet the needs of the community and identify future demand and need. This public input will help guide the update of the Maryland Land Preservation and Recreation Plan. You can help  advocate for the East Coast Greenway by attending the meeting and promoting its construction.

And advocate for other trails and bike recreation opportunities as well. 

Wednesday Afternoon Commute - Bike away from the Nazis or up the Big Stink

Good afternoon

• The Assembly is orgainizing a ride up the big hill by the trash transfer center that is part of the interim Metropolitan Branch Trail as a way to draw attention to the stalled MBT. "The hill is a symbol of the stalled progress in building the Metropolitan Branch Trail which when ultimately completed, will provide a smooth at-grade connection between Silver Spring and the National Mall. "
• Maryland bike symposium was today. 
• More John Kerry bicycle stories "And literally on the last day as the Germans were marching into Paris, my mother got on a bicycle with her sister and a couple of friends and biked out of Paris and forged her way across France, got to Portugal, where she got help to get on a ship to come back to America."

Alexandria 2014 Capital Improvement Program includes funds for Capital Bikeshare, area trails and more

Alexandria City Manager Rashad Young has proposed a FY 2014 budget that includes $600,000 for Capital Bikeshare expansion in 2014 and another $1,395,000 worth of expansion planned through 2022.

In 2013, work to identify station locations beyond the initial eight stations will be completed. The program will expand to Carlyle and Del Ray over the next several years through a combination of funding sources include CMAQ/RSTP funding, private (development) capital contributions, and Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) funding.

In addition, there is

• $500,000 for an update to the 2008 Bicycle Master Plan
• $0 for the Wilkes Street Bikeway, because no more local funding is needed. The project should go out to bid this year
• $1,317,602 for the Holmes Run Bike Trail upgrade, with work to begin in mid to late 2014.
• $500,000 in 2015 for a study of the feasibility of building a tunnel connection under the freight rail tracks from the Braddock Road station itself as recommended in the Braddock Metro Neighborhood Plan. Completion of the tunnel would provide a new station entry from the west, minimizing the distance pedestrians must walk to access the station from the west. Currently, pedestrians must walk south to the Braddock Road underpass to reach the station. In addition, the plan recommends studying a potential future pedestrian-bike connection and a potential walking route connection to the northern gateway
• $3,500,000 over the next four years for the Old Cameron Run Trail. This project will construct a shared-use path between Eisenhower Avenue near Telegraph Road to on-oad bicycle facilities that link to the Mt. Vernon Trail, addressing a major gap in the city’s proposed “Green Crescent‟ trail system and ultimately providing a key link in the bicycle and pedestrian multimodal transportation system.
• $3,200,00 for FY 2017-18 for a shared-use path along Backlick Run from Boothe Park west to the Fairfax County line. Once complete, the trail will help better connect the far west side of the City with the Mount Vernon Trail, and the existing trail network in the Ben Brennan Park and Eisenhower Valley. 
• $1,000,000 for the construction of safety improvements at the Mt Vernon Avenue/Russell Road Intersection in 2015-16. 
• $500,000 in FY 2023 for design and engineering funding for the construction of a multimodal bridge from the Van Dorn Metro Station to Pickett Street.
• $275,000 in FY 2014 for Safe Routes to Schools. 
• $7,870,000 for complete streets over the next 10 years. 
• $180,000 a year for shared-use path improvements and $10,000 a year for trail maintenance.
• $350,000 spread over 3 out-years for bicycle parking at the city's Metrorail and transit stations.
• $450,000 this year to construct safety improvements on the Mount Vernon Trail where trail width and conflicts with vehicles make non-motorized travel unsafe. Preliminary engineering for this project began in 2011. A property survey has been completed, and the next step will be to move the project to the 30% design phase. Right-of-ways may be needed and the plans for the Gen-On property may affect the project. Construction is not expected to begin until at least FY 2015. 

Wednesday Morning Commute - It's a problem

Good morning

• Lenny Bernstein of the MisFits writes a love ode to the Capital Crescent Trail, but I'll have to disagree with him on his opinion that one of the problems is that the "Purple Line light rail would run right down the Georgetown Branch." Or, at the very least he should mention how the Purple Line helps to solve several of the trails other problems like the crossing at Connecticutt Avenue and lack of connection to Silver Spring. If he thinks the CCT is popular now, wait until it connects all the way to Silver Spring and provides access to light rail transit.
• Phoenix Bikes used bike sale at Big Bear Cafe, 1700 First Street, NW, Washington, DC, March 9, 10am-2pm.

Yo Yo and DeAndre Windom see DC by Pedicab

She's a rapper and he's the Mayor of Highland Park, Michigan. I smell a wacky sitcom.

Tuesday Afternoon Commute - My bicycle and I were best friends.

Do you think Sunday night at the Oscars will be the last time William Shatner plays Captain Kirk? If so, it's an odd performance for the character to go out on. Like ending Star Wars with the Christmas Special.

• Sustainable DC = Agenda 21. Someone should open a bar on 21st street called Agenda 21. 
• Phoenix Bikes will hold its annual bike show and fundraiser on Thursday, March 21 from 7 to 9 p.m. at 251 18th St. South.
• Bikeshare can do this better. 
• New DC bike maps are in. 
• The Fairfax County Bike Trail has finally reopened. 
• The Boston Globe blames anti-cyclist bias for the failure to indict a driver of vehicular homicide in a hit-and-run case in Massachusetts. It puts this month's Cooper case into some context for why a plea deal might seem appealing to prosecutors.
• Again with the old chestnut about "the time I rode my bike into East Berlin."

Improvement to Maryland Three-Foot Law Defeated in Committee

The Environmental Matters Committee gave an unfavorable report yesterday to House Bill 445, which would have removed the "narrow highway" exception to Maryland's three-foot safe passing statute.  The Committee also rejected HB 160, which would have legalized riding bikes on sidewalks in localities with no local laws on the subject (Baltimore, Montgomery, Prince Georges, and Howard have local laws.)

As we've discussed before on the Washcycle, Maryland's three-foot law has four confusing exceptions.  One of those exceptions allows drivers to pass with less than three feet of clearance if the highway is too narrow for a driver to pass with three feet of clearance.  No one knows precisely what that exception means:  Bike Maryland thinks that this exception refers to virtually every two-lane road with a double yellow line, while I think that, regardless of what was in the mind of Delegate Malone when he inserted the provision, the rules of statutory construction mean that the exception only applies to narrow highways (e.g. country roads or one-lane bridges).  But if the cycling advocates can't agree on what it means, clearly the statute needs clarification.  The best way to clarify the statute would have been to eliminate this exception, which this bill would have done.

Why did the bill fail?  We don't know yet, though some of the contributing factors are obvious. Cycling advocates have focused more on HB 339, the mandatory helmet bill.  Two weeks ago, ten advocates showed up to a hearing at the Environmental Matters Committee, and passionately offered a wide array of arguments against the helmet bill. About 20 minutes later, Delegate Cardin presented the safe-passing bill to the same commitee, and only three of those advocates testified, along with Bike Maryland (which has taken no position on the helmet bill).  None of the advocates were as passionate about the three-foot bill as they were in opposing the helmet bill.

The truck drivers opposed the safe-passing bill, and interpret the existing law the same way Bike Maryland construes it.  They want to be able to pass cyclists more closely than three feet if the alternatives are to cross the double yellow line or wait.  Trucks are wider than cars:  It will often be possible for a car and a bike to share a lane with a three-foot clearance (if the cyclist hugs the edge).  But a 9-foot truck can only pass with 1-foot of clearance, and the truckers want to be able to continue doing so.  One representative added that they can't really tell whether they are passing with 3' feet or 2'6" anyway.  None of the cycling advocates made a strong case for why a safety buffer is more important than giving truckers what they want.

Another contributing factor was that Delegate Cardin also seemed to be preoccupied with other matters.  His presentation starts at 1:25:00 in the video of the hearing.  There was a subsequent colloquy with Delegate Vitale in which it became clear that the committee and Delegate Cardin had different versions of the bill (1:35:00).  A few minutes later, (1:38:00) Delegate Cardin closed that colloquy by providing an explanation that seemed to more closely resemble last year's bill than this year's bill.

If these are the reasons the bill failed this year, I hope that Delegate Cardin and Bike Maryland will stick with this version of the bill and try again next year.  It was a step in the right direction, and the fact that we did not convince the Committee this year had more to do with the fact that our minds were elsewhere than the merits of the bill.

With a little more preparation, we can make the case for removing the narrow-highway exception.  The idea that trucks should be able to pass bikes with less clearance than cars, simply because trucks are wider, is absurd.

(Jim Titus is a cycling advocate from Prince George's County.  The opinions expressed here do not represent the views of any organization with which he is affiliated.)