Good Morning
- When DDOT said the Final Metropolitan Branch Trail Environmental Assessment would be available any day now, I guess they meant "tomorrow, by lunch." This is a big step in the process to getting the next section built. After glancing at it, I don't see much that has changed, for the things that matter to cyclists, since the draft was released in November.
- The Broad Branch EA meeting material is supposedly online, but most of the links are dead. And I think the dates are wrong on the schedule. So an auspicious start.
- Not many NIH bike commuters (of which there are quite a lot) are willing to give up their parking space or transit benefit for the $20 a month bike commuter benefit. "Rep. Earl Blumenauer (D-Ore.), who sponsored the legislation, has introduced to Congress a bill that would allow commuters to combine the biking subsidy with other transit benefits." Which is a good solution, but I'd prefer one that simply mandates a tax-free cash payout for those who give up parking. That encourages walking too.
- Bike crashes are up 44% over last year in Fairfax county. Cyclists were found to be at fault in 27 out 46 crashes (with one of those being "both" at fault) or 58.7% of those reported. Not much information is given about the crashes. Found at fault by whom? The police? Or a judge? How many children were involved? Any bike-bike crashes (obviously a cyclist would be at fault there)? A likely cause in the increase is more cyclists. Bike counts in Arlington are up ~30% in Arlington from 2009 to 2010.
- The Georgetown Dish on Mary Cheh. "Cheh told the Post: “[Livable, walkable], that’s a slogan. ...Where’s the record?... I’ve passed major legislation. I’ll say ‘livable, walkable.’ If I say it enough, will that be OK?”). Let it be said: the two-term councilmember does have a smart growth track-record pro-bike track record. Indeed, she is often seen tooling around on her bike." [Aside: the author needs to know that, by contract, UT east of the Mississippi is Tennessee, not Texas]
- The Dandies and Quaintrelles are having a Moonlight ride tonight.
- There's a mysterious bicycle-inspired mural off N. Custis Road.
- There were a few questions about cycling on Kojo's show yesterday, including one about a bicycle tax. To which David Alpert replied "that's definitely not necessary. The bicycle projects actually are some of the least expensive. I mean, that 15th Street bike lane we talked about at the beginning costs virtually nothing compared to building a new road or even widening one."
- Quite a few photos of cycling in DC in the 20's here. Also, don't fall for the slick, dandified cake eater. Another rule of the Anti-Flirt Club, no one talks about Anti-Flirt Club.
- The Express reviews the book "The Urban Biking Handbook" written by a former City Bikes mechanic.
- A proposed expansion of the Gov. Thomas Johnson Memorial Bridge bridge over the Patuxent in St.Mary's will include a 10 foot wide bike/ped lane.
Everyone noticed that those are two, one-legged guys, right?
Posted by: bmeyer | July 15, 2011 at 08:10 AM
They sure liked to smile and point guns at people a lot back in the 1920s. What's up with the execution/target practice picture (photo #5)? Strange.
Posted by: Michael H. | July 15, 2011 at 08:22 AM
The execution/target practice picture is a sales demonstration of an old bulletproof vest. When I came across this image yesterday and showed it around the office (the National Law Enforcement Museum) I was surprised to learn we have a stack of similar pictures and some of the early vests themselves - including one that belonged to Dillinger.
And to really sidetrack everyone for a summer Friday, most of these pictures and many MANY more can be found at shorpy - www.shorpy.com
Try using their search engine for "bicycle". The "Washington DC" search has a lot of good stuff too, but because the source for many of the images is the Library of Congress collection it also brings in a lot images of other places.
Posted by: DaveS | July 15, 2011 at 09:08 AM
Found at fault by whom? The police? Or a judge? How many children were involved? Any bike-bike crashes (obviously a cyclist would be at fault there)?
Great point. This is a classic "apples-oranges" comparison. Many bike crashes involve children making poor decisions (though the way we organize our public spaces in suburbia and urban areas, where cars are allowed to speed with impunity, often leave little room for error). Obviously, no car crashes are going to be the result of children making a mistake.
But in general, statistics regarding cycling accidents are complete garbage.
http://www.bhsi.org/stats.htm
Posted by: oboe | July 15, 2011 at 10:12 AM
"Not many NIH bike commuters (of which there are quite a lot)"
Of which I am one. The problem is that the subsidy program suffers from a common conceptual error in such programs: it assumes a single method of commuting: either you drive , or you metro, or you ride. I think most of us (especially cyclists) do at least two and such narrow thinking forces us to give up support for one if we want support for the other...
Posted by: ken | July 15, 2011 at 11:13 AM
@ Ken. I agree. I'm a bike commuter with another agency and I wouldn't give up my Metro subsidy for $20 for biking. Since - by number of days commuted - I'm primarily a Metro user, that's just too valuable. The current bike program does little to encourage biking as a "transportation alternative."
Posted by: 7 | July 15, 2011 at 11:34 AM
I agree with 7 and Ken. The choice is one or the other, and the car subsidy FAR outweighs the bike subsidy. So, if you give up the car subsidy, you are pretty much giving up a big chunk of $$.
Posted by: SJE | July 15, 2011 at 11:49 AM
@7:
You're not Crickey7 (nee Krickey7) are you? If so, I love the new, "bad boy" moniker.
:)
Posted by: oboe | July 15, 2011 at 12:25 PM
The Prince George's County connector from Ft. Totten to the DC line would help complete a missing link in the trail network. Any idea of timetable on the DC side? What about the connection on the PG county side from the NW branch trail to link up? Is that in the works yet?
Posted by: Greenbelt | July 15, 2011 at 01:10 PM
I left the metro subsidy program in favor of biking all the time, though still occasionally use metrobus. I'd like the $20/month, but my department doesn't have it set up.
Posted by: Shawn | July 15, 2011 at 01:10 PM
@ oboe.
Nope.
Posted by: 7 | July 15, 2011 at 01:32 PM
The subsidy system is all screwed up. It is highest for cars, least for bikes. Peds get nothing. How is this encouraging people to live closer to work, reduce traffic, etc?
Then, it is all or nothing. At my office, I only get the parking subsidy if I get monthly parking. This only saves me money if I drive 4 days out of 5, compared to paying cash each time you park.
Posted by: SJE | July 15, 2011 at 01:44 PM
Shawn:
Why leave the metro subsidy program? I bike almost all the time, but when I don't, I take the subsidy. The only condition on receiving the subsidy is that you don't drive, which I don't.
Posted by: I forgot | July 15, 2011 at 06:00 PM
This video was posted in GGW.
http://vimeo.com/23743067
It's impossible to keep track of all the illegal moves made by drivers. There are just too many. As for cyclists? I didnt see a single one breaking the law.
(While the guy trying to pass two others in the intersection was unwise, it is actually not illegal)
Posted by: JJJJJ | July 15, 2011 at 06:20 PM
I ride metro to work so infrequently it's not worth taking any money for it. I don't think I used metro for all of June, and only once in July. $6, the WMATA experience and missing my bike are incentive enough to ride the next day.
Posted by: Shawn | July 16, 2011 at 09:42 AM
(While the guy trying to pass two others in the intersection was unwise, it is actually not illegal)
Can someone clarify this? The guy in question is riding into oncoming traffic traffic outside of the cycletrack crossing lines. Legal?
Posted by: guez | July 16, 2011 at 01:33 PM
Yes, biking and transit benefits should be integrated. The original program wasn't all that great for people in metros where decent transit systems exist.
2. Boulder might be the only city in the US to have a bicycle excise tax on the sale of bikes. They use the money to pay for trails development.
http://gazettewonder.freedomblogging.com/tag/bicycle-excise-tax/
While for a variety of reasons I think it's justifiable for bike, ped, and transit improvements to come out of gasoline excise taxes, I don't have a problem with a bike excise tax if the money is dedicated.
There is a federal excise tax on certain outdoor recreational equipment which supports lands and other conservation efforts which probably indirectly helps bicycling here and there:
http://www.southwickassociates.com/node/10979
Posted by: Richard Layman | July 17, 2011 at 11:07 AM