DDOT proposes Eckington bike lane, commissioner opposes

DDOT wants to help people on bikes traverse R Street in Eckington with sharrows and a one-block contraflow lane. ANC commissioner Sylvia Pinkney is organizing a petition to oppose the project, but some of her fellow commissioners and neighbors don't share her distaste. R Street has an existing bike lane west of Florida Avenue, but there is a gap in Eckington, where people biking use R Street to access the Metropolitan Branch Trail. Most of R in Eckington is 2-way, with one lane each way and parking on each side. In these areas, DDOT plans just to add "sharrows," the shared-lane markings that remind drivers that people biking are allowed to ride in the lane (though legally this is true whether or not the markings exist.) For one small block between 2nd and 3rd Streets NE, R Street is one-way eastbound. It's wide enough for two lanes, but two lanes aren't really necessary. DDOT is suggesting replacing one of those with a contraflow lane, between the parking and the sidewalk. It will be painted green.

Drivers have to go one block out of the way, to Randolph Place NE, if they want to go west through this area (or take a different route). But this is not good for people on bikes since it requires going up a fairly substantial hill on around McKinley High and then down again. Also, people riding on the Met Branch Trail know R Street is a way to get all the way across town, while many people aren't so familiar with Randolph Place. However, ANC Commissioner Sylvia Pinkney is organizing against the lane. Pinkney's district is just to the west, covering R between 2nd and North Capitol. She is also the commissioner who led the charge against the Youth Build Public Charter School. In an email to neighbors, Pinkney announced her opposition to both the bike lane and the sharrows.

The community struggled for five years to obtain speed humps to slow the traffic on R Street. Between the construction trucks, Fed Ex trucks, buses, local community traffic, and every driver that chooses to cut through R street to avoid Florida Avenue and access North Capitol Street, R Street has become a dangerous heavily traveled thoroughfare. It is because R Street NE is dangerous, heavily traveled, and not wide enough for a bike lane, that the meeting participants agreed that bike lanes and symbols should not be installed on R Street. If R Street is not wide enough for a bike lane it is not safe for bikers. There are several secondary streets in Eckington that lead to the bike trail. I am certain R Street is the most heavily travelled, most dangerous, and the narrowest of them all.

Pinkney's concern for cyclists' safety is touching, but misplaced. There really aren't other decent routes. One of the multiple readers who wrote in about this issue said,

I live on the unit block of S Street NE, and take that street to work every day. There is no other way to get to the R Street bike lane without going on North Capital, Florida Ave or Rhode Island Ave, so how does disallowing sharrows make me safer?

Putting in the bike lane would actually help neighbors who want traffic calmed. If this street becomes an even more common bike route, the many people riding in the lane will force drivers to slow down and give the street more of a feeling of a low-speed neighborhood street than a high-speed thoroughfare. Likewise, the contraflow lane will narrow the 200 block, also calming traffic. First-term ANC Commissioner Tim Clark, whose campaign platform included making Eckington safer for cyclists, is enthusiastic about the proposal. He wrote in an email,

Some people's belief that the community would outright object to the lanes is based on a common misconception that people in our community don't embrace cyclists or bike lanes. I myself found this not to be true when I spent 3 days canvassing the 200 block of R. Street. In fact, it's very far from the truth. So far I've had only one resident to object to the plan. Many of the residents where more than willing to share the road with bikers and felt it would make the street a lot safer. They only asked that the lane be kept to the outside of their cars to avoid any possible property damage. ... My residents are supportive of the plan and making our community safer for all pedestrians. With the massive NoMa West project and increased residential growth over the last couple of years, our roads have become increasingly crowded, which has encouraged more residents to bike. R Street is also one of the only east-to-west connectors for bikers in the city, so there's a need to make the commute safer.

If you live in the area or frequently ride or drive through Eckington, please email the ANC members and DDOT's Mike Goodno to register your support for the project.

Crossposted at GreaterGreaterWashington

Comments

[Shawn]

Email sent - thanks! I ride through this area on the way home, and it's pretty crazy.

[Inez]

Another email sent. I always feel bad for the pedestrians I have to sneak around when I hop up on the sidewalk for that one-way block.

[JeffB]

"They only asked that the lane be kept to the outside of their cars to avoid any possible property damage"

What does this mean? Is it more important that keep private cars stored on public property in a position of maximum safety over and above legitimate street users?

If you are going to do contraflow lane then it should be done using the parked cars as a safety barrier from on-coming traffic.

[oboe]

If people want to live in car-dependent suburbs they should move to car-dependent suburbs.

[SJE]

Oboe: you gotta be careful with that argument, because its logical conclusion is that all cyclists should move to Europe.

[oboe]

@SJE:

Not quite. The logical conclusion is that people who ride bikes (and people who value walkable areas) should move into the cities. Which is exactly what is happening.

My sense is that the exurbs are going to continue to become tangled, sprawl-choked car-centric places, and the cities are going to be given over more and more to pedestrians and cyclists at the expense of drivers. We're reaching a tipping-point.

It's "The Big Sort"...

[Greenbelt]

I'm hopeful that many of the closer-in suburbs, especially in low- or moderate-income areas with aging housing stock and dated commercial facilities, will realize that complete streets, bike infrastructure and pedestrian connections could be an enormous re-development tool. Raise quality of life dramatically by catalyzing new, greener local development. At some point, we're going to realize that existing to host drive-through highways and arterials for the outer suburban folks is a losing proposition for our communities.

[oboe]

@Greenbelt,

I think this is going to be a natural process. As population growth puts pressure on regional housing, the options for folks who want to live in walkable neighborhoods shrink. This pushes folks who care about walkability and transit into these closer-in, yet suburban-in-character suburbs. As their numbers increase, the political pressure on politicians will grow as well.

You see this in places like Mt Rainier and Hyattsville. East of the River is next. I know a lot of young couples who don't make a lot of money who were priced out of Columbia Heights, Hill East, and even Trinidad who ended up there.

[Shawn]

I got a response and they said to check their web site for the next ANC5 meeting and to show up (I'll be out of town that week).

[Phil K.]

They should also add a contraflow lane southbound on 3rd Street between R St. & S St.; if you come down 4th St. (from CUA area) and want to get to the bike lane on Eckington Pl. by way of Harry Thomas Way, you have to sidewalk/salmon it for a block to connect (or hump it several extra blocks over the hill by the school).