Saturday Morning Ride

Capitol Hill Bikes is back "Marie Osmond-style" - smaller, but still good.

Richard Layman points out that the photo that accompanied the Post's story about bike lanes on Penn (a class II bike facility) was of a sharrow (a class III bike facility).

The C Street, NE alternatives put together by Toole Design are basically the same for cyclists. They trade a bike lane for a cycle track, raised and within the curb space.

North Carolina Avenue would get an eastbound cycle track and retain its westbound bike lane, while the westbound cycle track would continue on the one-way portion of C Street west of 16th Street and transition to a standard bike lane as the road narrows past 15th.

Rails-to-Trails wonders if the Rhode Island Avenue bridge on the Met Branch Trail might have saved the Edgewood Safeway.

We Love DC notes that Bike to Work day is May 21st and the Air Force Classic Crystal City Ride, which closes off streets in Arlington, is June 13th.

Marcel Acosta, the Executive Director of the National Capital Planning Commission, responds to a question on allowing biking on trails after dark

Bianchi: Does the NCPC have a relationship with MD-NCPPC? If yes-then please help convince MD-NCPPC to treat bike trails, any bike trails but especially those within 3 miles of metro train stops as the commuter routes they are. Currently these trails are 'closed' at dark even within a half mile of a metro stop, i.e. West Hyattsville. This is patently stupid. During winter its dark during 'peak' hours.

Marcel Acosta: The Maryland National Capital Park and Planning Commission (M-NCPPC) often requests that NCPC provide comment on its plans, particularly on draft versions of Vicinity Sector Plans (i.e.: Kensington Sector Plan). Additionally, if changes are proposed to the stream valley parks NCPC review may be required, as authorized under the Capper-Cramton Act of 1930.

NCPC's comments usually focus on consistency with the planning principles and policies outlined in NCPC's Comprehensive Plan for the National Capital: Federal Elements. The overarching principles in the Comprehensive Plan states: "Reinforce 'Smart Growth' and Sustainable Development Planning Principles. NCPC staff views transportation elements as part of this effort and when providing feedback, NCPC strongly encourages the improvement of trail linkages between transit stations and the stream valley park bicycle trail system. I will ask my staff to talk to planners at MD-NCPPC about exploring ways that would allow the bike trails to serve as a more usable commute option.

Froggie gives bad news/good news on bikes on DASH buses

As currently proposed, there is no money for DASH system expansion, the DASH bike racks won't happen until FY 2018...But, the current proposal would use [the proposed 3 cent transportation tax revenue] to...install bicycle wayfinding signage, and finally add bike racks to the DASH fleet (instead of waiting until FY18 as the proposed CIP budget does).

He also has posts on improving cycling in Alexandria and a comprehensive proposal for making Andrews Air Force Base bike friendly.

The Silver Spring Transit Center, and its part of the Met Branch Trail, is a behind schedule.

Despite an original opening date of late 2010, the newest opening date for the transit center is June 20, 2011

FABB has an update on Fairfax County's Snow Summit. The top idea of county respondents to deal with snow is "Require Sidewalk Shoveling".

Richard Layman on the long time between the idea to make things better, and things actually getting better.

Another way to put it is this: advocates point to places like Portland as an example and say "why aren't we like that, right now?" while failing to recognize that Portland is where it is today because it has been focused on sustainable transportation planning and implementation since about 1970 (when they tore down the Waterfront freeway, and created the Downtown Plan in 1972 which staked the future of downtown on transit and restricting parking), with successive physical and planning improvements every year (including the development of a light rail and streetcar transit system). Plus other changes, like the Urban Growth Boundary, creation of a Metropolitan government, amazing staff people, the development of and support from a sustainability oriented urban planning program at Portland State University, etc.

Top photo by Gerald Martineau/the Washington Post

Bottom photo by Christopher Anderson/The Gazette

Comments

[O2]

Mr. Layman neglects to mention the broad, forward-thinking support of the citizens of Portland, without which I doubt they would have come nearly as far as they have. He notes "7. Support, interest, and willingness not to mention advocacy for walking and bicycling improvements on the part of citizens." as the last item on the list in his blog post, whereas it should probably 2nd or 3rd.

Working with the public to reconcile differing perspectives and priorities can not be emphasized enough. I am not questioning Mr. Layman's planning talents, but having worked with planners and architects I have witnessed "Vision" become "Tunnel Vision" all too often with a resulting build-it-and-they-will-come approach that often meets a broad public resistance and makes it much more difficult to accomplish anything other than a pretty, rendered master plan in a wire bound booklet.

Same could be said for a blog that does not understand the value of broad public support and instead chooses to incite the militant cycling minority by skewering automobile drivers and lambasting elected officials and radio entertainers who don't agree with their POV at every opportunity.

[tudor clothes]

yes we should also credit the portland citizens for their undying support.. :)

[washcycle]

OK O2, I just don't have what it takes. I don't know how to make a blog about DC-area cycling that appeals to broader public who isn't interested in, or is hostile to, cycling. I eagerly await O2's Blog on Building Broad Public Support for Bicycling. Until then, I suggest you quit misrepresenting my writing. I did not "lambast" Kornheiser. I merely printed out his own word. I don't skewer automobile drivers as a class.

You want some skewering.
You're a liar. If you have to lie to make your point, O2, then it must not be a very strong point. And you're a coward. You pop in with a fake email address and name, make negative comments about the blog and then never respond to legitimate questions. You aren't interested in having a conversation. Man up, or get lost.

[Michael H.]

O2, "militant cycling minority"? Not wanting to get hit by car drivers makes a cyclist militant? Wow. The reason so many people are upset about the Kornheiser show is because there are so many drivers RIGHT NOW with that attitude who actually do act on those inclinations. (It's happened to me twice already.) That's why it's so dangerous to provoke and "joke" about that situation. It's not a theoretical situation. The attitude that it's just a joke to force a cyclist off the road while driving a 2-ton SUV will definitely result in someone crossing the line. It won't change a safe driver into a menace but it will ease someone who is already an unsafe driver and who has a cavalier attitude about the safety of others, over the line and into criminal behavior.

So I guess every pedestrian or safe car driver who complains about an unsafe car driver or who complains about someone expressing a desire to run anyone off the road would be militant. But I hardly think that would be a minority. I'm guessing that maybe, oh, 95% of the population would fall into that category. The rest are the people causing the problem or who are drinking too much or texting too much while driving and think that everyone else should mind their own business. If someone's actions or provocations have a significant potential to affect my personal safety and the safety of thousands of others, then yes, it is my business and the business of everyone here.

[Michael H.]

O2, by the way, WashCycle does seem to have a broad readership. Your very presence here as an anti-cyclist individual proves that this blog does draw readership from a variety of perspectives.

While I might even agree that a few of the people who comment on this blog are a little too strident and close-minded, I hardly think that categorization applies to washcycle himself.

What other entertainers has this blog "lambasted at every opportunity"? I've seen some posts that correct misstatements about cycling uttered by various public officials or public personalities but no hostility was directed at them. The difference with Kornheiser's statement is that he was explicitly advocating violence. That definitely deserves a strong response. If TK had just ridiculed cyclists for "shiny pants" for an hour, well, no big deal. I could care less. But when he starts talking about running cyclists down and agitating for others to do the same, that's an entirely different matter. TK's assistant was bringing up news stories that seemed to portray EVERY cyclist as not only a rude user of the roads, but as a gun-toting bank robber. That is patently ridiculous. And then the show had people emailing in with comments about buying a Toyota so one would have a legal defense of an accelerator malfunction if one used that car to run down a cyclist. That is not inciting violence? It sounds like the beginnings of a feeding frenzy to me.

As far as I've seen, no one here has advocated any violence against anyone. And if they did, I wouldn't agree with that. Neither would the vast majority of people here. Most cyclists merely want to be able to ride on the roads (as they are allowed to do under D.C. law) without having drivers think they have the right to run them down or force them off the road with the threat and use of physical force.

With apologies to any bike messengers here, I do have to say that I've had a few negative experiences with some of the bike messengers in town, mostly with some individuals riding at over 20 mph on crowded downtown sidewalks during the lunch hour on regular work days. I almost got knocked down a couple times while walking on the sidewalks. (It's illegal to ride on the sidewalks in the central business district, let alone speeding down those sidewalks.) But that wouldn't affect TK in his car at all. He never mentioned anything about this problem.

I have also seen the occasional cyclist cross through a busy intersection against the light and flip off an angry driver. But that has been an extremely low percentage of all the cyclists I see in town, less than 2 percent. To tar and feather all cyclists for the actions of a few is not fair to the thousands of law-abiding individuals. There is a much higher percentage of drivers who break laws (stopping in "the box," running red lights, speeding, shifting 3 lanes at a time on the Beltway, etc., etc., etc.) and yet no one here is calling for them to be run off the roads.

[SJE]

O2: I would be interested to hear your thoughts more fully developed and supported by facts and citations, rather than pot shots at Washcycle.

As for Portland, I would not say that Portland got where it is entirely where it is because of wide public support. Rather, the attitudues and devotion of activists and the willingness of public leaders to try something different. The vast majority of Stump towners do not bike, and there is a strong residual anti-bike, anti-hippie attitude throughout Oregon.