Oh God, you devil

Next in the Great Cycletrack Battle of 2013 (last update here), DDOT speaks and WABA asks to talk to the Mayor. 

DDOT had a post on their blog d.ish - which in itself is something of an oddity - in which they laid out their reasons for putting the cycletrack on a diet.

During the design process, it became clear that the original cycle track design would have had an impact on church operations that take place within the block and limit the ability to accommodate special events at the church along with routine activities.  Metropolitan AME has a large congregation and has been an important institution on this block since 1925.  In addition to an existing arrangement for angled parking for Sunday morning services, the church frequently hosts special events throughout the day and the week, such as funerals, that occupy several lanes to manage large numbers of vehicles.  The street on this block is narrower than those west of Connecticut Avenue which limits flexibility in the allocation of space for the competing uses.

GGW elaborated on this pointing out that

If this block used the same design [as the rest of M Street], then the church would not be able to have diagonal parking on Sundays, or much on-street parking at all for weekday funerals.

Then they went on to discuss the four options as District Department of Transportation (DDOT) Associate Director for Policy, Planning, and Sustainability Sam Zimbabwe sees it (Reduce church use of M Street at all times, reduce church use of M Street on weekdays, cycletrack becomes a bike lane, or cycletrack is moved to sidewalk level). 

Meanwhile WABA is asking the Mayor to talk to them, but it's pretty clear they don't like the change. 

From a transportation standpoint, this decision is wrong: Data—and common sense—indicates that removing the bollards will make cyclists less safe and decrease ridership. From a planning standpoint, it’s wrong, too: It undercuts the entire purpose of the M Street cycletrack, which is to provide a safe crosstown connection and encourage bicycle ridership. Additionally, the M Street cycletrack will help achieve Mayor Vince Gray’s Sustainable DC goals. By changing the design of the cycletrack, DDOT has intentionally compromised the safety of cyclists with no reasonable justification.

DDOT has also reversed previous public statements made to us and to the community, without the opportunity for further input. Since 2005, WABA has attended numerous public meetings about the M Street cycletrack, from those about its planning stages to those about its actual design. At no point—until now—has DDOT proposed compromising the safety of bicyclists by removing bollards.

For the city’s transportation agency to make such an egregious change is irresponsible. The design of the M Street cycletrack is unacceptable.

Breaking DDOTs argument down leads to the following points. 

1. The original cycle track design would have had an impact on church operations
2. Metropolitan AME has a large congregation and has been an important institution on this block since 1925

That's it.

I don't know how much weight to give item 2. I suppose it has more weight than "Metropolitan AME has a small congregation and has been an unimportant institution on this block since 2005," but how much more? Whether or not we should give greater weight to institutions that have a long history or just them all the same is probably another conversation (though, back in Texas, I used to roll my eyes whenever someone would start a comment with "My family has been Texans for 5 generations and ..." or whatever, as though that somehow gave their statement greater weight - so I don't see much of a difference here). And the claim of "importance" might have more value if someone would say how they're important. Are they running a soup kitchen or a homeless shelter? If so, they've been admirably modest about it.

So, they're large and they've been around for a long time. Value that how you will. It's a very good reason to not take their church with eminent domain. Less so for not restricting their use of on-street parking.

As for how it would impact their church operations. It sounds like we're talking about Sunday parking and weekday double parking for special events.

Sunday parking could be accommodated many different ways running the gamut from letting them park in the cycletrack on Sundays to letting them use only 2 out of 3 lanes for church parking (instead of 3 out of 4).

For funerals and other events, it would seem the church would be able to get by with the space in front of their church. Make that a restricted parking area and have the church not schedule events during rush hour.

Will that work? I don't know, because DDOT hasn't really been very specific about what the impacts are. They've been very clear and public about the alternatives that have been considered and dismissed for dealing with the cycletrack, but there has been NO talk about what alternatives were considered and dismissed for dealing with the church's needs. Were they asked about other parking? I don't know. 

Nor has there been any discussion about whether addressing the church's needs in this way actually serves the goals of the city. 

The church leadership keeps describing this as a win-win. But this is not a win-win. The church is getting to keep the status quo. Cyclists are having to settle for less than they've planned for. I don't think this is a zero-sum game - I do think everyone can win - but I do think THIS solution is a negative-sum one. 

Comments

[turtleshell]

Most churches have funerals at many different times and services on Sundays. Maybe we should ban cycle tracks in front of all churches? I'm not sure what makes AME special?

Are they just one of the best churches at complaining?

[M-Kay]

DDOT should be very wary of this line of reasoning. If I remember correctly, the city is about to embark on a streetcar network that will have a lot more inflexibility than bike lanes. Do they want to set this precedent that well-connected local institutions get to re-route things if it causes them any grief?

I think every post on this cycletrack needs to mention that it is ON THE OPPOSITE SIDE OF THE STREET FROM THE CHURCH!!!!

So the elderly parishioners will still need to cross a couple lanes of traffic mid-block from their convenient parking spaces to reach the church (BTW, this is how the lady on Florida Avenue NE died - crossing mid-block to reach church - does DDOT really want to encourage more of this clearly risky behavior? ... or, will they put a HAWK signal in next?)

It's clear that DDOT is being forced into this ludicrous design and worse explanation by forces above their pay grade, but we still don't quite know who is forcing their hand.

[M-Kay]

Just occurred to me, what do all the Churches on H Street do when they have a funeral? Does DDOT condone double parking in the streetcar lane there? Will they stop the streetcar line for these special events so as not to affect the church's longstanding practices?

[Smedley Burkhart]

"And the claim of "importance" might have more value if someone would say how their important. Are they running a soup kitchen or a homeless shelter?"

Ah, echoes of the Jacobean position on works vs. faith.

Yet, let us consider the words of Paul in Galatians 2:16: "Yet we know that a person is justified not by the works of the law but through faith in/of Jesus Christ. And we have come to believe in Christ Jesus, so that we might be justified by faith in/of Christ, and not by doing the works of the law, because no one will be justified by the works of the law."

[tour guide]

Strange this the DDOT says this church has been "an important institution on this block since 1925". Metropolitan AME was the site of Frederick Douglass' funeral in 1895. http://www.metropolitanamec.org/aboutus.asp The National Park Service says the building was dedicated in 1886 http://www.nps.gov/history/nR/travel/wash/dc60.htm.

[tour guide]

Here is an idea for an eager researcher. When did M Street become one way? What was the church's position at that time?

[tour guide]

I am puzzled that the DDOT claims the church "has been an important institution on this block since 1925". However in 1895 this was the site of Frederick Douglass' funeral. http://www.metropolitanamec.org/aboutus.asp. The National Park Service says the building was dedicated in 1886. http://www.nps.gov/history/nR/travel/wash/dc60.htm

[JeffB]

I have to wonder why this became an issue right before construction of the track. I take DDOT at its word that they reached out to the church several times over the years of planning. Maybe the church leadership just procrastinated in responding until the last moment or maybe there is another explanation?

As we enter the mayoral campaign season wouldn't a fight over bikes lanes signifying "old city" versus "new city" prove useful for some candidates?

Defining such a divide helped Gray defeat Fenty 3 years ago. Now having continued the very programs he, surreptitiously, bashed Fenty for maybe he is feeling vulnerable? What better way to shore up support among the old guard then to step in at the 11th hour and save the city from the ravages of "those" people and their ideas.

It also nicely puts the sustainability crowds favorite pol, Tommy Wells, in a tough spot. Every fiber of his being must be crying out to come to the rescue of the cycle track. Yet if he does then he will have lost the opportunity to make inroads with the conservative black middle class voters in the city - support he probably desperately needs to have a real chance of winning.

[tour guide]

I am puzzled because DDOT says the church "has been an important institution on this block since 1925". In 1895 this was the site of Frederick Douglass' funeral www.metropolitanamec.org/aboutus.asp. The National Park Service says the church was dedicated in 1886 www.nps.gov/history/nR/travel/wash/dc60.htm

[tour guide]

Just after Hurricane Katerina the church parked a couple of semi trailers on the south side of the M street for several days(weeks?). The trailers collected supplies for hurricane victims. How did they manage the traffic disruptions?

[T]

Special events eh? I've worked next to the church for almost three years. In fact I can see them from my window right now, literally. I would guess the number of special events they host per year during workday hours is around 15, tops. And i'm including a presumption of two elections each year, which isn't the case (they are a precinct).

I would suggest WABA challenge DDOT to show them the permits to prove the above point otherwise. They can't do it because the church simply isn't used much outside of weekends.

As for weekends, DDOT agreeing on the parking is ridiculous. It's impacting diagonal-only spots! They don't allow diagonal parking one block up between the circle and 15th St even though I'm sure the hotel and soon-to-be Argentine steakhouse would want it. And they don't allow it down the street between 16th and 17th, where I'm sure National Geographic would want it. So what makes the damn church so special?

Oh, it's been there since 1925. Wonderful. By that rational, so has 1/2 of downtown DC. It hasn't stopped Donald Trump from trying to build a hotel in the former Post Office Building, has it? Yah, I don't really care about that argument. They have almost a dozen parking garages within 3 blocks including one immediately adjacent to the church, two metro stops and a half dozen bus lines within a block. They're just pompous pricks with overinflated egos.

[RDHD]

How long will it take for another, non-church, institution to appeal for the same treatment, get denied and then sue the District on grounds of unconstitutionally giving preference to the church? Surely if the AME can provide data showing that they require the road to look a certain way others can too. You cannot do this for just one party.

[tour guide]

I am puzzled because DDOT says the church "has been an important institution on this block since 1925". In 1895 this was the site of Frederick Douglass' funeral www.metropolitanamec.org/aboutus.asp. The National Park Service says the church was dedicated in 1886 www.nps.gov/history/nR/travel/wash/dc60.htm