New section of the South Shore Trail is almost complete

Southshore trail

South Shore trail, terminus of Phase I, Waterbury Road to Hansel Drive

A 1.8 mile section of the South Shore Trail in Anne Arundel County is almost complete and more sections of the planned 14 mile trail are in various stages of design. Another section, from Annapolis Plaza to Anne Arundel Medical Center in Annapolis opened in 2013.

The South Shore Trail primarily utilizes the abandoned road bed of the WB&A Railroad between Annapolis and Odenton. The trail will connect with the Colonial Annapolis Maritime Trail on the east end and the WB&A Trail on the west. The trail will be a component of the East Coast Greenway and the American Discovery Trail. 

Leaving Donna Holliday Clark

Donna Holliday Clark

Just before 11pm on June 26, 2015 Donna Holiday Clark was riding south on her bicycle on Ritchie Road in Capital Heights. At the same time a driver heading south on Ritchie Road was passed by a black Dodge Charger and another dark car travelling at very high speed. In the witness' opinion the two were racing. Camera footage from a nearby business confirmed that they were travelling much faster than the witness. The two cars disappeared over the hill before Edgeworth. Shortly after, the driver found Clark, lying in the roadway with her purple Kent Avalon bicycle - where the driver who killed her had left her.  Her shoes had been knocked into the opposing lane. The witness called 911 and tried to render aid, but Clark died before making it to the hospital. 

Clark was a fitness fanatic but she was riding home that night from work because she couldn't rely on transit since the closest Metro station was 3 miles away. 

A little over a week later a tip led the police to a car in South District Heights, Maryland that met the description of the striking car. They found a grey Honda accord with freshly repaired front end damage.

While inspecting the vehicle, Dion James Hancock came out of the home the car was parked in front of. The police asked if he knew who the car was owned by and Hancock said it belonged to his recently-deceased father.  Police asked him if he knew how it had been damaged and Hancock said an ex-girlfriend damaged it. When asked about his whereabouts on the night Clark died, Hancock said he was at his new girlfriend's home and that he had gotten home at around 2am after calling a Lyft. The police then asked him if he or someone else could have struck a cyclist with the car.

Hancock didn't answer, but instead asked what the penalties were for having an accident and not reporting it. The police explained the penalties and then read him his Miranda rights, which he invoked. 

Following the acquisition of a subpoena, the police determined that Hancock didn't have an account with Lyft, or take his first ride with them, until June 28th. The name and phone number of the new girlfriend he gave them were checked against several data bases and no one with her name could be located. The phone number revealed no one by that name that had ever owned or used it. 

Without enough evidence to determine the identity of the driver, this case remains open.  There are also no records of a civil case. 

The Vision Zero Enhancement Act of 2018 (and 2019)


Charles Allen announced plans to submit an updated and expanded version of his Vision Zero bill from last year. That bill was introduced in November of last year, after the Vision Zero hearing in September, which itself followed a year in which traffic fatalities continued to rise. Prior to that, DC had been promoting the unbelievably optimistic chart above (from a Feb 2018 MWCOG slide show). By the way, in that same presentation, they knew things weren't going like the chart above, because they included the chart below. One would think they would have sounded the alarm bells then, not wait for bike advocates to do so 4 months later. 


Anyway, back to Allen's bill. That bill had several good ideas in it, but it didn't even get hearing. The bill would do the following:

  • Reduce the citywide speed limit to 20mph in residential areas - those zoned in Subtitles D-F and K in Title 11 of the DCMR

  • Prohibit Right Turn On Red within a half mile of schools, in all of downtown and at intersection with a bike lane

  • Authorize towing and impounding of vehicle blocking the bike lane

  • Establish a Citizen Bike Safety Enforcement Pilot Program. The program would select and train 10 citizens and then authorize them to take photo of bike lane violators with an app. Those photos will then be treated as a notice of infraction. 1 year after the pilot ends, a report on the pilot would be sent to council 

Those are all good ideas. What would an expanded bill include? I don't know, but I got ideas.

  • Get rid of the 10mph buffer on photo enforced tickets. 
  • Add points to photo enforced tickets
  • Make talking on the phone while driving illegal, hand-free or otherwise
  • Create more ways to enforce violations, like cameras on buses - and also have fines increase for repeat offenders
  • Require DDOT to remove on-street parking by setting a statutory limit (this will make it hard for them to give in to pressure to keep it)
  • Increase the fee for a Residential Parking Permit
  • Increase registration fees for heavy cars, cars with a high top speed and/or the most deadly make of cars
  • Raise the gas tax
  • Create a congestion zone
  • Allow MPD to impound cars with rear license plate covers (they're already illegal and are meant to thwart cameras)
  • Raise the tax on alcohol and use revenue to pay for an OWL bus service. 
  • Close streets in bar districts near metro on weekend nights
  • Create a requirement to retest drivers

While we're at it, there are a lot of things DDOT is already supposed to do, but has not. The "Bicycle and Pedestrian Safety Amendment Act of 2016" required the Mayor to send to the council a report and recommendations as to whether the District should implement a remediation and deferred disposition program for individuals that commit moving or nonmoving infractions in the District.

The report shall include the following:

(1) A review of the best practices in other jurisdictions;

(2) An examination of issues such as staffing levels and implementation costs;

(3) The moving and nonmoving infractions, if any, to which the remediation and deferred disposition program should apply;

(4) Whether the remediation and deferred disposition program should reduce the entire fine or number of points assessed, or a portion of the fine or number of points assessed; and

(5) If the Mayor recommends implementing a remediation and deferred disposition program, the report shall include a detailed description of the content of any proposed safety course provided in the program, the process by which a person would participate in the program, and the alternatives available to participants in lieu of paying a fine or being assessed points.

That was due on July 1, 2017. Let's just skip the report and have them design a system for deferred disposition. I don't really want to fine people for driving bad if instead I can teach them to drive better. 

Here's some other reports the Mayor was supposed to produce but hadn't as of last summer:

A) Annual reports on locations with the highest frequency of collisions that injure or kill pedestrians
B) Annual reports on the Bicycle and Pedestrian Priority Area Program
C) Annual reports on the Complete Streets policy progress
D) A report on whether DC Circulator buses and District-owned, heavy-duty vehicles should be equipped with pedestrian-alert technologies. 
E) A report on whether emergency vehicles should be equipped with cameras
F) A biannual report for improving bicycle and pedestrian safety (this only came due on July 1, 2018)
Also all trucks registered in DC are all supposed to have side underrun protection by now. Do they? Maybe the Mayor should report on that too. A requirement to report on that could go in the law.
It's ridiculous that pedestrians and cyclists should be so over-represented in the share of fatalities as this graph shows. 
Mode share
Meanwhile, Mary Cheh has introduced the Mandatory Protected Cycling Lane Amendment Act of 2019. That bill would basically require DDOT to build any bike facility that is in the MoveDC plan on a road that they are doing "any road reconstruction, major repair, or curb and gutter replacement on." Those lanes should match up with other ones on the same road. But, they must still consult the ANC, the DDOT director can still decide not to build them if they're too expensive, it wouldn't be used by cyclists, the road can be made safe for cycling without the facility or the District would need to buy an easement to make it work. That's a lot of loopholes. 
One last bit of legislation to mention, Charles Allen introduced another bill on Tuesday, the Florida Avenue Multimodal Project Completion Emergency Amendment Act Of 2019.

this one aimed at enacting plans to redesign Florida Avenue in Northeast.

“I’ve asked, pleaded, criticized, and urged DDOT to take action and make needed decisions. That hasn’t always worked. For every year I’ve been on the Council, I’ve asked DDOT to move forward with the redesign of Florida Avenue NE. And each year, action is promised and then not delivered,” Allen wrote on Facebook. The legislation would set a timeline for the project and a series of penalties if the agency fails to meet the deadlines.

Initial thoughts following the Dave Salovesh murder

On Friday Dave Salovesh was killed by a driver in a stolen van who was speeding away from a police stop, ran a red light, hit a car and ricocheted into Dave. This was at Florida and 12th, NE. The driver was charged with 2nd Degree Murder. 


Dave and I only met a couple of times, but we disagreed on Twitter often. Dave saw incrementalism as accepting defeat and I saw it as being reasonable, and this was the source of our conflict. The last time I saw him he approached me to bury the hatchet as it were. I was still smarting from our last exchange but I came around and we shook hands and agree not to argue anymore and that we were on the same side. He was the better of us because I would have just left things in a bad place and I'm glad we didn't. 

I still believe that we should take the wins we can and move the ball forward, but Dave wasn't wrong. I remember reading in college about an white abolitionist who, in 1850, had a compromise plan to phase out slavery over the next 100 years. I'm sure he thought he was being reasonable, but the idea that we'd have still had slaves in America in 1949 is just insane. In 1850, the right time to end slavery was 1850. Dave is right that anything less than facilities that meet our goals of safe, green streets - especially in the name of congestion relief an on-street parking is morally wrong. The right time to build safe streets is 2019.  

Florida Avenue

It is not lost on anyone that the street on which Dave died has been part of a study process since 2009, and one that has missed numerous deadlines. One that made choices based on congestion, parking and automobile throughput to the detriment of safety. Dave was hit by a large vehicle, going at high speed and one could argue that even with a protected bike lane the outcome would have been the same. But even if you think that a protected bike lane would not have saved him, that's no less reason to be angry about the way the Florida Avenue redesign - and Vision Zero - have been carried out. 

The 2009 NoMa Neighborhood Access Study & Transportation Management Plan didn't include bike lanes on Florida, but it did recommend implementing a road diet and sidewalk widening over the next two years. That would have been early 2012. That work has not been done. 

In June 2013, following the death of a pedestrian in a crosswalk on Florida, they started the Florida Avenue Multimodal Transportation Study. That study came up with three alternatives, of which Alternative 3 included regular bike lanes on Florida Avenue east of West Virginia - the section where Dave was killed. But that option was dropped due to concerns about automobile throughput. For the same reasons, the sidewalks in this section are not to be widened either. This is actually in keeping with the purpose.

The purpose of the Florida Avenue Multimodal Transportation Study is to improve safety for all roadway users, particularly the most vulnerable (pedestrians and bicyclists), while ensuring safe access and improved mobility
for all modes within and through the study area.

Notice that language - improved mobility for all modes must be ensured, but improving safety is not. It also prevents certain trade-offs. Anything that would improve safety while hampering the mobility of drivers is out-of-scope. There's a whole section entitled "importance of motor vehicle access and mobility".

Look at this chart on the alternatives analysis. 


There's a whole section on auto safety; which is not to imply that isn't important too, just that it's called out and no one else's is. Nor is there simply one "safety" metric. Alt 3 is objectively better for pedestrians, cyclists, and transit users but has "local street impacts" when compared to the selected alternatives (a combination of 1 and 2 that doesn't even take full advantage of the improved auto safety alternatives). But the 5 level ranking doesn't give us enough of an idea of how much better or worse things are. A metric I'd like to see is "number of expected deaths". Let's just lay the choices out there. 

Part of the importance of auto efficiency is due to federal requirements. Florida Avenue is part of the highway system and must meet federal requirements and comply with applicable Federal regulations on performance (as defined by the FHWA). And part is likely explained by the fact that this predates Vision Zero. And the other part - because the purpose of the project wasn't defined with safety as a premium. 

Similarly, the study recommended bike lanes on West Virginia - if it didn't impact parking too much. Those have been on the books since at least 2005, but they still aren't there. 

If congestion in that section is really the problem as the study states it seems like that could be solved by removing the parking/peak traffic lanes and replacing them with bus/bike lanes (enforced with traffic cameras and barriers. Moving the 12 bus routes through the corridor faster would encourage fewer people to drive. You know what else would help? A downtown congestion charge. Because the benefits of congestion charging extend beyond zone where the charges occur. That would be the vision zero design. 

But even if we live with the recommended alternative from 2014, we're still left being angry at the pace. The multimodal study was to finish in May of 2014 but didn't until February of 2015. In 2017, they were to be done with the 100% design in Spring of 2018. They were still at the 30% design this past January with the 65% and 100% designs still to go.

They aren't working towards streets that maximize safety and then they aren't hitting their own deadlines to build the safety-compromised alternatives they've selected. No wonder the roads aren't getting safer.  

Vision Zero

And of course this is all emblematic of the larger problems of Vision Zero, which Dave often pointed out.

At least the Florida Ave study didn't pretend to be anything other than it was - an attempt to improve safety without making driving any worse. Vision Zero, on the other hand, is an attempt to create a city where people don't die or get seriously injured due to simple mistakes. But we are not taking the bold steps needed to reach such an audacious goal on the timeline we set. Or any other timeline either. It's as though the purpose of the Florida Ave study is the real idea - make roads safer, but let's not make driving any worse. And it's not limited to DDOT. Not only are we not tearing out miles of curbside parking and auto lanes to put in transit lanes, bike lanes and wider sidewalks, we aren't doing things we know will work - like a congestion charge. We still don't enforce traffic laws that are regularly broken in a way that make the roads safer. We could use cameras to enforce crosswalk violations and bike lane incursions for example. 

I've talked to many legislators who know that driving while talking on the phone is dangerous, hands-free or not, but like guests in the Exterminating Angel they seem to feel unable to make that illegal. "People would never put up with it" one told me. But they'll put up with deaths of their loved ones, I suppose?

It doesn't have to be this way. New York City is moving with real purpose - and that's with their own admission that they don't have full control of their own laws. They have to get the state to change laws for them. 

Maybe the problem is with the Mayor and DDOT. If so Council can follow the example of Cambridge, MA and force them to build safer streets. 

Cambridge, Massachusetts, passed a law on Monday directing the city to build new protected bike lanes whenever it does road work on certain streets. Known as the Cycling Safety Ordinance, it applies to all streets mapped out in the Cambridge Bicycle Plan, which recommends 20 miles of protected bike lanes throughout the 7-square-mile city, and effectively puts the weight of the law behind cycling infrastructure.

DDOT sometimes seems reluctant to follow through with their own ideas because of community opposition. This could give them the cover they need by saying "look, it's not up to us. We're just following the law." That might require council members to take the heat and risk losing their seats. But that seems like a better option than allowing people like Dave to lose their lives. 

Also, I updated this. 


The Washcycle is on vacation this week


Three options for Seminary Road complete streets road diet

Alexandria held a meeting last month to present the three alternatives on Seminary Road between N Howard Street and N Quaker Lane.


Alternative 1 will just repave the street as it is, but 2 and 3 add bike lanes on the outside with either a 2nd lane in the westbound direction or a center turn lane

The alternatives also change some of the intersections, by removing exclusive turns, adding LPI or removing Right Turn on Red, for example.


Alternative 3 is the best option according to GGW:

Alternative 3 is the option that the Federal Highway Administration recommends to address safety issues on roads like Seminary Road. It is also the most pedestrian- and bicycle-friendly design of the three. It includes painted bicycle lanes with a one-foot painted stripe (a buffer) between the traffic and bicycle lanes. There's also an opportunity for protected bicycle lanes to be installed in the future.

This is a complete streets project, so the bike lanes are part of the point. If they don't add bike lanes, after putting them in the Transportation Master Plan, then this project will be a failure. 

Locals don't like the project, but for once the problem is not parking. Instead it's cut-through traffic and reduced throughput on the road. In addition they complain that

  • No one bikes this road and why would we want more scofflaws
  • The road is already safe enough, so no need to slow people down to make it safer

I don't know how one can claim that there's no safety problem, when people continue to be injured in crashes on this road - and they do - but it's definitely in line with our generally "oh, well" cavalier attitude towards road injuries and death. But the point of Vision Zero is to stop seeing injuries and deaths as OK, as long as they're below some threshold. The threshold where they're OK is zero. And this road isn't there yet. 

Several of the identified changes will make the roads safer, by reducing collisions at intersections and slowing traffic speed. Here are the other reasons for the project

1. Improve mobility and access for all roadway users

2. Provide continuous, safe, and comfortable places for people to walk

3. Provide more frequent and safer crossing opportunities along the corridor

4. Minimize delay at intersections, and encourage speed limit compliance

5. Where excess roadway capacity exists, explore opportunities to reconfigure the corridor to better serve all modes

So even if you successfully make the argument that getting drivers to drive slower doesn't make things safer, there's still the other elements. 

As for the argument that no one bikes the road, that's neither true nor relevant. A review of Strava data shows that people do ride it. And if no one rode it, that might be because it is too inhospitable and that a complete street could fix that. 


The claim that it will limit throughput is addressed and it will slow traffic at the worst of rush hour, but people are driving too fast anyway. Mostly though the road will function the same.

Four-lane undivided roadways often already function like three-lane roadways. This is because people driving often use the outside lanes to avoid traffic that is slowed or
stopped in the inside lane to make a left turn.

Spillover traffic is addressed as well

For the majority of road diets, the Average Daily Traffic (ADT) remains constant, indicating little to no diversion to neighboring side streets. Preliminary traffic analysis for the Seminary Road project has shown that while average queue lengths may be longer during the peak hour, the amount of delay remains comparable to existing conditions due to modified signal timing and thus should not encourage cut-through traffic.

Staff will closely monitor conditions on side streets after the project is completed (regardless of which alternative is selected) to evaluate impacts on neighboring streets. Data that was
collected after the King Street road diet showed no traffic diversion onto key connector streets. In fact, traffic volumes actually decreased on side streets.'

The comment period ended April 10th, but I mean you can still fill out the form

Goldsboro Road Bike and Pedestrian Improvements

The Montgomery County Department of Transportation (MCDOT) is proposing pedestrian, bicycle and traffic improvements along a 1.18-mile segment of Goldsboro Road (MD 614) in Bethesda/Glen Echo, Maryland, from approximately River Road (MD 190) to MacArthur Boulevard. This project would connect on one end with the MacArthur Boulevard Bikeway, Goldsboro Road is built in the Minnehaha Branch valley and so it should make for a route that isn't too hilly. 

The proposed improvements along Goldsboro Road will widen the road from a two-lane road with shoulders to two 11-foot travel lanes, 5 to 6-foot-wide separated bike lanes in each direction with 2 to 3-foot-wide buffers from traffic, a continuous sidewalk on the north side of the road and intermittent sidewalks provided on the south side of the road where space is available. At the intersection with MacArthur Boulevard, a 4-foot bikeable shoulder and an 8-foot wide shared use path is proposed along the east side of the traffic circle.

By separated, they mean fleposts

The $21.1 million project just finished the 35% design phase. Protecting the Branch and the trees in the valley are some of the main concerns of the Planning department which has reviewed the design. They also think MCDOT should consider lowering the speed limit and adding No Right Turn on Red signs at River Road. Most dramatically they recommend that MCDOT reconsider the design.

To minimize cost, forest loss, stormwater and stream channel impacts of this project, consider an alternative concept that includes a 10-foot-wide sidepath on one side of the road, intermittent sidewalks at bus stops on the other side of the road, and a 4-foot-wide bikeable shoulder on the eastbound side. This would reduce the total typical cross section compared to the proposed design by up to seven feet. While not consistent with the bikeway recommendation in the Bicycle Master Plan on Goldsboro Road, this alternative would be consistent with the general principles of the Bicycle Master Plan.

If the speed limit is lowered, it may be that cyclists would feel safer in the roadway in the downhill direction, but want a protected facility - like a sidepath -  in the uphill.

At MacArthur the project includes new sidepaths.

Screenshot 2019-04-02 at 12.02.01 PM

DDOT to discuss recommended 20th/21st protected bike lanes on Saturday

image from

DDOT is hosting a meeting on April 13th from 10am to 1pm at School Without Walls at Francis-Stevens, 2425 N Street NW to discuss their recommendation for protected bike lanes on 20th and 21st streets (used to be 20th/21st/22nd or the Western Downtown Protected Bike Lanes).

In December they presented 3 alternatives. The ANCs held several meetings, some contentious, and finally settled on resolutions about where the bike lanes should go. After reviewing all of the public comments on those alternatives and the ANC 2A and 2B resolutions, as well as the safety and operational considerations of the three alternatives, DDOT selected a recommended alternative.

The recommended alternative will be primarily on 20th Street NW, with an east-west connection to 21st Street NW using F and G Streets NW. The recommended alternative includes:  

  • Two-way protected bike lane on the west side of 20th Street NW between Connecticut Avenue and F Street NW

  • Two-way protected bike lane on the east side of 21st Street NW between G Street and Constitution Avenue NW

  • One-way protected bike lanes on F and G Streets NW to connect between 20th and 21st Street NW

During the public meeting, DDOT will discuss design coordination with the Dupont Circle Farmers Market, as well as options for connecting to the R Street NW bike lane. 

Putting the bike lane on 20th "could reduce the footprint of the Dupont Circle Farmers Market by as much as 60% and create serious safety hazards for shoppers, farmers and producers, as well as cyclists" according to the market.

Montgomery County Planning Board reports on trails

Last week, the Montgomery County Planning Board presented it's semi-annual report to the County Council and it included quite a bit about trail expansion and safety.

In total the county has about 245 miles of trail, much of which is unpaved or natural ground, according to the report.

“Trail usage data and surveys continue to tell us that our trails are among our most highly utilized and desired facilities,” said Michael Riley, who serves as Montgomery County Parks Director. “They serve so many different purposes from community building to physical fitness.”

Riley reported that a major project currently in the works is the Upper Paint Branch Trail plan which will create a sustainable multi-use trail network in an area that has fewer trails available.

“There was a low level of service in East County,” Riley said. “The trail will provide links to parks community destinations and a larger countywide trail network.”

It will also provide access to natural areas for people to enjoy. The project is in the implementation phase, Riley said.

The Upper Paint Branch trail system will be a natural surface trail system in eastern Montgomery County, near Burtonsville, Fairland, Cloverly, and White Oak.  There are four phases and work on phase 1 started in February. Phase 1 consists of a pair of natural surface loop trails near the source of the Good Hope Branch, a tributary of Upper Paint Branch. Phase 2 builds most of the trail north south along Upper Paint Branch, connecting to the Anacostia Tributary Trail System at Fairland Road, and should be built in the 2-5 year range. Phase 3, to be built more than 5 years from now will create some small pieces as well as extend it north to the Patuxent and west to New Hampshire Avenue. Phase 4 will be built sometime later and will consist of an underpass beneath Briggs Chaney Road.


The report also notes that the next section of the Power Line trail is scheduled to be completed by January 2020. It "will double the distance of the trail to connect Quince Orchard Road to Cabin John Regional Park." And that

To expand potential commuting opportunities for residents, Montgomery Parks will launch a year-long pilot program in spring 2019 to allow e-bikes and e-scooters on all hard surface park trails within the county. Throughout the pilot, Montgomery Parks will solicit public input to consider the possibility of making it a permanent program, which will also accommodate the growth in commercial dockless e-bikes and e-scooters in the county and DC region

The planning board is also focused on improving the safety of at-grade trail crossings

“We’ve identified 121 locations where park trails cross roads. We’re able with our current funding to improve about ten intersections per year,” Riley said.

The goal is to improve all of them by 2030. 

According to Riley, the trails have their own Vision Zero project that aims to eliminate deaths and injuries that are preventable by the design and laws of the roadway. Often that means redesigning streets so that pedestrians are more visible or lowering the speed limit for cars.

“I still meet regularly with state highway (officials), DOT and county police about the Henson crossing at a very small road where unfortunately we had experienced fatalities,” Riley said. “It is much improved but there is still more to be done, and I’m not going to quit on that until I believe that we’ve done absolutely everything we can do to make that intersection as safe as possible.”

There was also another fatality on the Little Falls Parkway where the Capital Crescent Trail crosses a major roadway.

In the first quarter of 2019, four projects have been completed and eight additional projects are under construction. Additionally, 15 crossings are scheduled for the design phase this spring.

Bikesharing and trails apply for Commuter Choice funding, but score low

Local jurisdictions submitted applications for $20 million in transit improvement funding paid for by the I-66 tolls. The applications totaled $32.8 million in requests, so some won't get funded and based on the scores none of the bike projects will. The four bike projects included were:

  1. Bike share implementation in Vienna - This project would add up to four bike share stations in the Town of Vienna. These stations would add to the extensive Capital Bikeshare network and help Vienna residents and visitors connect to Metrorail, commuter buses and regional trails.
  2. Bike share implementation in Fairfax - This project would support the start-up operating costs and add up to 10 bike share stations in the City of Fairfax. These stations would add to the extensive Capital Bikeshare network and help Fairfax residents and visitors connect to Metrorail, commuter buses and regional trails
  3. Trail access to the Vienna Metro - This project would enhance access to and from transit by partially funding approximately 4,600 feet of shared-use trail to connect pedestrians and bicycle users to the Vienna Metrorail station and other activity centers and trails along the I-66 corridor. (See below)
  4. Residency Road Trail Access to the VRE Broad Run Station - This project will cover the costs of designing and constructing 3,200 feet of shared-use trail to connect pedestrians and bicycle users to the Virginia Railway Express Broad Run station. 


But all 4 rank in the bottom 7.

The N. Washington St & Gresham Place Intersection Improvements also has a bicycle element and it also ranks near the bottom.

"An area without crosswalks and pedestrian signals, the intersection of N. Washington Street and Gresham Place will benefit from enhanced connectivity and access between downtown Falls Church and the East Falls Church Metrorail station. The intersection improvements include signal replacement, traffic calming and other improvements for pedestrians and bicycle users."

Comments are open until May 15th

Banner design by

City Paper's Best Local Bike Blog 2009


 Subscribe in a reader