TheWashCycle

Long Bridge Project proposes trail bridge too

The expansion of the Long Bridge is likely to include a new multi-use trail bridge from Long Bridge Park to East Potomac Park that could be available by 2025.

Last night project members presented the preferred alternatives for the bridge. The plan is to expand the number of rail lines crossing the Potomac from two to four, and the options were to build two new bridges or build one new and rehabilitate the other. They chose the latter. In addition they're proposing to include a separate multi-use trail bridge connecting Long Bridge Park, the Mt. Vernon Trail and East Potomac Park as a potential Section 4(f) Mitigation. While DDOT wouldn't say how likely it was that the MUT would be built, they noted that there was support from everyone relevant and no opposition. All they need is the money (and a project sponsor which will likely be DDOT). I'll add that DDOT has shown sustained interest in the MUT bridge so I'm more optimistic than pessimistic that it will happen.

For cyclists the railroad bridge options are identical. The main impacts are that the 2nd bridge will cross over the Mount Vernon Trail, a wider railroad bridge will go over the Anacostia Riverwalk and the current pedestrian bridge over Maine will be removed and replaced creating a better connection between the Riverwalk and Maryland Avenue. 

I'd proposed that the trail be extended to Maine Ave or even L'Enfant Plaza but that isn't going to happen and it would be incredibly expensive to do so. I didn't realize that the trackage would be expanded on the east end and the additional 4th track is in the space where I'd thought a trail could go. The real tight spot is at Maine Ave where the tracks abut the ramp from "14th Street" to Maine on the "north" side and the Mandarin hotel on the south side. Fitting a trail in that area would be difficult. And extending the trail would require four more bridges. I'm not saying it can't be done, but it would neither easy nor cheap. 

The trail bridge would be a separate bridge north of the railroad bridge, between it and the Metro Bridge. Separating it from the railroad bridge will reduce the costs by about 20%, reduce security needs, simplify inspection and maintenance, reduce the footprint and is what the railroads prefer. It will be on the upstream side to allow for an easy connection to the Long Bridge Park. It will have three connections, one at Long Bridge Park, one at the Mt. Vernon Trail and one at Ohio Drive, SW in East Potomac Park. In that way it's really doing the work of two separate bridges. 

The trail bridge will be 14' wide and 25' from the railroad. It's considered 4(f) mitigation in exchange for using NPS land.

Interestingly, the project will require the demolition of the current pedestrian bridge across Maine from the Mandarin to the Anacostia Riverwalk, which I think was named the Rosa Parks Bridge during a contest after it opened, but the article announcing the name is no longer online as near as I can tell. The current bridge, which opened in 2004, has stairs on the Washington Channel side and isn't particularly useful. As the Post noted

But it's a niggling thing, hard to find and, for wheelchair users, impossible to navigate.

The replacement will have a ramp which should make it more useful for cyclists who want to get to/from Maryland Avenue. Not sure if they'll move and re-use the historic railroad bridge or build something new.

Who knows, maybe the two new bike bridges will serve as the down payment on a direct connection. The Rosa Parks could be extended to Ohio Drive SW, where it would be on the opposite side of the railroad tracks, which is not much of a detour for a cyclist. Maybe someday...

Five companies apply to provide dockless bikeshare

Despite the concerns of many, it does not seem that DDOT's dockless bikeshare and e-scooter regulations are leaving the market bare. Five companies have applied for a permit to offer dockless bikeshare. Eleven, most of them the same as those offering bikes, applied to offer scooters. 

The five applicants for bikeshare are Riide, Lime, Ridecell, HOPR/CycleHop and JUMP.  Riide will be the only one offering just bikes. If they're all approved and they all go to the maximum, that could add 3,000 new dockless bikes after permits are issues on New Year's Day. 

This is the first time the city is implementing permanent rules and permitting for the dockless vehicles. The companies already operating in the city have been doing so under a temporary pilot program that began in 2017.

Since each of the companies was required to submit a standard application for a 2019 permit, Zimbabwe said the city can now get a better understanding of operations to determine if any changes are needed for 2020.

“We’ll be evaluating the program overall … during 2019 to figure out if we keep the same approach or how it continues to evolve into the future,” Zimbabwe said.

Everybody's talking about transportation

Two big wide-scope regional transportation plans have been put forward recently, and surprise surprise they both rely on more biking in the future.

The first is Visualize 2045, which has been covered here before. Recently the TPB had subject-matter experts from the TPB’s subcommittees present recommendations for how to implement five of the seven initiatives from Visualize 2045. One of those goals is to "Improve walk and bike access to transit". 

The Bicycle and Pedestrian Subcommittee recommended:

To develop a limited list of transit station areas that are regionally prioritized for pedestrian/ bicycle investments. These prioritized locations will be places where critical gaps in pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure currently exist and where demand is great for walking and biking to transit. Improvements in these areas will also improve safety in and around the stations, particularly for pedestrians and cyclists.

Prioritize traffic signal timing, turn lanes, crosswalk locations, and transit priority on roadways surrounding transit stations. These improvements would help people using all modes of transportation. They would also improve safety for people biking and walking, and improve bus reliability.

Expand the TPB’s Transportation Land Use Connections (TLC) Program, which currently provides technical assistance to TPB members for short-term planning activities to develop communities that are multi-modal and mixed-use. Subcommittee members believe that the TLC program has been highly cost-effective and enhancing the program would assist in having more non-motorized projects ready for funding and implementation.

Another is to complete the National Capital Trail

The Bicycle and Pedestrian Subcommittee notes that the National Park Service (NPS) worked with the subcommittee to adopt the National Capital Trail (NCT) into its Trail Master Plan. With some of the missing segments of the NCT located within National Park property, this action by the NPS is a significant step towards completing the trail.
One of the basic recommendations related to this initiative is for all appropriate regional jurisdictions and agencies to:

Integrate the missing segments of the National Capital Trail into other highway, transit and other infrastructure projects so that the trail can be completed.

The subcommittee also noted that, thanks to numerous projects that have been built or funded in recent years, the National Capital Trail is well on its way to completion. Therefore, the subcommittee also recommends that the TPB expand the National Capital Trail to the entire TPB region (National Capital Regional Trail), thereby extending the trail to all TPB member jurisdictions.

There has been great interest among the region’s jurisdictions, agencies, and advocacy groups to build on the National Capital Trail, as endorsed by the TPB and adopted by the NPS. The Capital Trails Coalition was established through a public-private partnership to work on this idea. The subcommittee worked with the coalition to develop a framework through which trails from other jurisdictions that are not included in the NCT would be strategically incorporated to form a true regional trail system (National Capital Regional Trail). This work activity is not complete and is in need of a regional sponsor to take on responsibility for finalization. Once complete, this National Capital Regional Trail could represent the region’s prioritized trail network to be considered for local, regional, and state level funding.

The other big plan is the Blueprint for Regional Mobility, released Monday by the Greater Washington Partnership. It also advises an expansion in regional bicycle trails. In fact, GGW says it's more ambitious on them. One of the 20 actions proposed is "Complete trail networks in all three cities." [That would be DC, Baltimore and Richmond]. 

Baltimore and DC have trail network plans, and the straightforward Blueprint recommendation is to implement them. Richmond, on the other hand, needs to create a trail network plan and then build it.

The Blueprint defines the action as

Complete the Baltimore Greenway Trails Network and Capital Trails Network, and establish a Richmond trail network strategy

It also calls for congestion pricing, which should make biking more appealing for commuters, relative to driving at least. The blueprint itself calls on leaders to expand and connect

the region’s multi-use trail networks to increase access to recreation and safe travel options for bicyclists and pedestrians.

It notes that

The Capital Region benefits from hundreds of miles of multi-use trails. Investments in a few critical trail connections for bicyclists and infrastructure for pedestrians can achieve further reductions in congestion, increase economic development, and improve community health outcomes.

The Baltimore and Washington metro areas have clear strategies to close gaps between existing trails and the Richmond metro area should develop such a strategy. If executed well, the region has the potential to generate economic benefits as high as an 8:1 return on investment as seen in other U.S. regions and reduce rates of chronic diseases—reducing direct health treatment costs in the community

The average Capital Region resident can access more than 1,320,000 jobs by vehicle, 109,000 jobs by transit, 203,000 jobs by bicycle, and 25,000 jobs by walking within 45 minutes from their home.

Investments in multi-use trails could increase bicycle and pedestrian travel (which are shown to reduce health costs)—generating a return on investment as high as 8:1 in other regions.

Richmond already has some great biking infrastructure. And, because it's an older city with a lot of railroad infrastructure, it has a lot of potential for rail trails that can form the core network. For example, much of the ROW of the old Richmond to Ashland electric interurban still exists. 

It all starts with good planning, and so far these seem to have good plans for bike trails and transit access. 

DC announces special crews to clear snow from bike lanes

WTOP reports that DC is going to have “non-motorized trail” work details this year "specifically assigned to clearing bike paths, bridge deck sidewalks and ramps compliant with the Americans with Disabilities Act at intersections."

To help accomplish that, the city purchased new equipment.

“It’s still a little too wide to do all of the (city’s) bike lanes, but it looks pretty good to do many of them, those that aren’t hemmed in by cars like the cycle track,” said Mary Cheh, chair of D.C. Council’s Committee on Transportation and the Environment.

And keeping bike facilities clear came up at the snow summit this year.

The city is also vowing to make bike lines and paved trails a bigger priority this winter.

“It is a big part of our snow program, and we have purchased equipment in the offseason to make sure we are prepared to treat bike lanes and nonmotorized trails with the same efficiency and effectiveness that we treat roads and bridges,” said Shorter. “It’s why we purchased new equipment.”

That new equipment is actually different from what was used last year, which Shorter said worked well, but wasn’t quite as nimble as the city needed.

“This blower will allow us to spread [and] to plow on bike lanes,” he added. It’ll be attached to an ATV that city workers will used to get through what can sometimes be narrow bike lanes. “It’s a great piece of equipment and we’re looking forward to using it this season.”

There has been steady progress by the District in clearing bike facilities. 10 years ago I think it was hard to convince District leaders that snow needed to be cleared and that it could be done. Recently there were issues about deciding who (DDOT, NPS, DPW?) would do the clearing. But I feel like in the last couple of years much of that has been settled and now it's a matter of executing. Buying new equipment for the job is a real step forward. We'll see how it goes. 

 

The Crescent at Chevy Chase, what's in a name

The Montgomery County Planning Board will this week review applications for new apartment buildings along the north side of the Capital Crescent Trail(CCT) and on the west side of Connecticut Avenue. The buildings will be called the Crescent at Chevy Chase. It's a good sign that trails aren't bad for property value when housing projects take advantage of their halo effect. 

According to the Chevy Chase Lake Sector plan the blocks just north and south of the CCT/Purple Line between Connecticut Ave and the country club are part of the Chevy Chase Lake town center so its not surprising they want to densify this area. 

Newdale Ave is on the south side of the project and the CCT is just south of that road. The trail there is mostly on the ramps to the bridge over Connecticut, but it connects to the west side of Newdale (blue circle below). Between Newdale and the CCT the plans call for a 10' wide paved path that will connect the Trail to Connecticut Ave (higlighted). The Crescent project will contribute $29,958 to the construction of that path and will pay for street trees along it (if the path is completed by 2023). There will also be "bicycle accommodation" provided on Newdale Ave.

You can see the new shared-use path along Newdale on the image below.

Not part of this project, but I stumbled on it looking for this, is this landscape plan for the trail that includes a plan for the Sleaford Road Connector Trail. There was always a small connection from Sleaford to the CCT, but as part of the Purple Line project, it will be upgraded and extended south of the Purple Line to East-West Highway, with an underpass beneath the trail and rail. 

And the plan for Rock Creek Park too

Arlington Inner Loop

With the opening of the newest section of the Washington Boulevard, there's now an opportunity for Arlington to create a second loop trail, this one entirely within the other. 

The current Arlington Loop uses the Mt. Vernon, Custis and Four Mile Run trails to create a 16.2 mile loop around the county. The Arlington Inner Loop, or the AIL Trail if you like, would be a 6 mile loop around Arlington Cemetery and Fort Myer that uses the two segments of the Washington Boulevard Trail (WBT), the Arlington Boulevard Trail (ABT) and the Route 110 North Trail (110).  

It's not trail the whole way, but the parts that aren't trail are mostly short. From the Pentagon Memorial, one would have to use sidewalk or road along Columbia Pike, Southgate Road and Orme to get to the wide sidepath along Columbia Pike, but that section will be changed when Arlington Cemetery is expanded. Trail users would also have to use one block of S. Rolfe to get from the Pike to the newest section of the WBT.  Then there's a long on-road section from Rolfe or Rhodes (depending on which side of Arlington Boulevard one decides to use) to the trail near the Marine Corps Memorial. On the inside portion of Arlington Boulevard, there's room for a two-way protected bike lane. It would require narrowing the travel lanes, but traffic is light and the speed limit is 25 mph, which I think is routinely ignored, so it should be a benefit, 

It would also need directional signage, ideally using unique branding, but the trails need signage anyway. For example, a trail user heading clockwise on the WBT will find a sign that says the bike route ends when they get to Arlington Boulevard; but a simple left turn after the underpass will get them to the ABT. There is no signage to tell them that. Similar directional signage would be useful at Pershing Drive, N Rolfe Street, N. Rhodes, N. Meade, etc...

While they're at it, the section of the WBT from Memorial Cirlcle to the Pentagon (I think they should count both the section from S. Rolfe to Arlington Boulevard and from Memorial Circle to Columbia Pike as one WBT) needs to be widened and upgraded, which is in the 2014 Master Transportation Plan. That section was built ~20 years ago and it just isn't up to snuff. 

Anyway, the new section of the WBT is great . It really makes for a quick connection and it even has an extra connection at 6th Street. Also, it was my first time on the Marine Corps Memorial Access Road since it was repaved and it is nice.

 

Washington Boulevard Trail Ribbon Cutting on Nov 30th

Installation of trail bridge in July 2018

Phase 2 of the Washington Boulevard Trail is complete, and Arlington plans to cut the ribbon on it on November 30th at 1pm at Towers Park. It didn't take long for the work to get done, having started back in February, but it sure took a long to get it started. 

Phase 1, a short section from the Arlington Boulevard Trail to a dead end just past Walter Reed Drive, was completed in 2010 and we've been waiting 8 years for Phase 2 to extend it.  The project got hung up in some local disputes over trees leading to multiple redesigns and it wasn't until last year that everything was approved. 

The project has undergone substantial redesign to minimize the removal of existing trees. The project includes an extensive planting plan that includes 263 new trees. The new trees will replace the canopy over time, and with invasive plant management a native ecosystem can be established that provides an enhanced environment for wildlife, and an aesthetic landscape that benefits the community’s local urban forest.

But now that both phases are complete, it creates a 10 foot wide N-S bike trail between Arlington Boulevard and Columbia Pike. 

Since Washington Boulevard was built on the right of way of the old south Arlington branch of the Washington, Arlington and Falls Church interurban, one could consider this to be an eventual conversion of the right-of-way into a road with trail. 

In a way this could be thought of as only one half of the Washington Boulevard Trail. The other half starts at the Mount Vernon Trail near Memorial circle and follows along the south side of Washington Boulevard between it and the Pentagon and the Pentagon Memorial to Columbia Pike. Once the section of Columbia Pike north of Washington Boulevard is rebuilt to allow for the expansion of Arlington Cemetery, the trail will be complete - and so will a second Arlington Loop, but this one around the Cemetery.  

Coverage of the ribbon cutting is here. 

Alexandria and DC will limit right turns on red at more intersections.

Following a unusually deadly summer for DC cyclists, increasing fatalities for DC road users and criticism from safe streets advocates, Mayor Bowser returned to her Vision Zero pledge with several new initiatives, includes no right turns on red at more intersections. 

The city also is considering banning right turns on red at 100 locations, according to the District Department of Transportation. The intersections are in school zones and within the central business district or near bike lanes, where the risks to pedestrians are highest, officials said. Drivers will also see more restrictions on left turns at some intersections.

Bowser last month sent a set of new regulations to the D.C. Council establishing tougher penalties for traffic infractions to deter dangerous road behaviors — chiefly speeding. Those are expected to go into effect in December.

But wait, there's more...

• Eliminating areas where two lanes of traffic can turn left at the same time. The city has got rid of 15 of those intersections and plans four more by the end of 2018.
• Doubling protected bike lanes from 10 to 20 miles and accelerating the construction of a dozen of those project in the next three years.
• Adding “hardened” medians to slow vehicles turning left, especially at intersections with a large number of vehicles and pedestrians.
• Expanding the District Department of Transportation’s pick-up and drop-off zones for ride-hailing vehicles and delivery to help reduce the amount of stopping in bike lanes and crosswalks. Five new zones will be added in places like the Wharf and 14th Street.

These are all positive steps with the potential to save lives. Not as many lives as getting people out of their cars and on to transit, bikes and their feet will, but real lives. Kudos to them if they hit these goals. 

 Alexandria is going to follow suit on right turns on red. 

Starting late fall 2018, staff with the Department of Transportation & Environmental Services (T&ES) will install new ‘No Turn on Red’ restrictions as part of the implementation of the City’s Vision Zero initiative to improve safety on our streets.

As part of the Vision ZeroAction Plan, City staff analyzed crash data, industry best practices and research, public input, and also formed an interdepartmental collaboration team to develop a set of Year 1 Engineering Priorities. These engineering priorities are intended to improve safety for all modes of travel, focusing on increasing safety for vulnerable road users (e.g., people walking and biking, children, and seniors). One of these Year 1 Engineering Priorities is to install ‘No Turn on Red’ restrictions at 10 intersections to improve safety for people walking and driving. 

 

Crash data was analyzed for 2011-2016 during the Vision Zero Action Plan process. The data showed that during this time, 445 people walking were involved in crashes with one in seven of those crashes resulting in death or serious injury to the person. Turning-movement crashes were found to be among the most common crash types in Alexandria. 

 

T&ES staff will be implementing a portion of these new restrictions over the coming months. During implementation, T&ES staff advises residents and visitors to stay alert to potential new traffic patterns across the city. 

But Frederick Kunkle at the WaPo isn't so sure that limiting RTOR will make the roads safer and the fact that he cites John Townsend of AAA makes me suspicious right away. 

John B. Townsend II, a spokesman for AAA Mid-Atlantic, said he believes eliminating the right turn on red would be counterproductive. Better engineering design would be preferable than getting rid of right turns on red, he said.

“This might sound counterintuitive, but banning turns or creating a no-turn zone in the District is unlikely to increase traffic safety in the nation’s capital. It would likely decrease it,” Townsend said. He said some research suggests that collisions could increase with a ban on all of these turns, because drivers then have to wait for green — and those vehicles would be moving at full speed. “So you are creating an even greater risk for vulnerable users.”

Except that's not what the paper he cites says. It isn't basing the claim that ending RTOR could cause more crashes on research, but their own hunch.

If prohibiting right turns on red at all intersections would clearly improve pedestrian safety, we would support such a change. However, we do not believe that this is the case. Prohibiting right turn on red would require drivers to turn on green. This would most likely increase the number of collisions by right turning vehicles. It is also intuitive that accidents involving right turn on green are relatively more severe than right turn on red, as vehicles in the former case are moving nearly at full speed.

That last part doesn't make sense. If a car is going full speed then that means they got to the light when it was green. RTOR or not, they're going to turn then. It's not a choice between RTOR or RTOG it's between RTOR and RTOG or just RTOG. The new drivers turning on green would be starting from a stop (and might slow down drivers approaching the intersection who now have to queue up). 

The paper cited also says

sometimes the City and County of San Francisco prohibits RTOR at intersections with high volumes of pedestrians, primarily to keep drivers from infringing on pedestrian right-of-way by creeping into the intersection. We feel this is an appropriate reason to prohibit RTOR, but it is not primarily done for safety reasons. Of course, as noted, we also prohibit RTOR where limited sight distance or unusual roadway geometrics dictate.

Which is what DC and Alexandria are doing.

 

Kunkle also mentions a 1995 NHTSA study that he says shows that RTOR had a negligible impact on on the risk of traffic deaths. Which makes sense, since the study was of entire states - and RTOR as a danger is more of an urban issue. That same report showed that about 20% of all right-turn-on-red crashes involve a person on foot or a bicycle, which is much higher than their rate of other crashes (6%). 

• When a RTOR crash occurs, a pedestrian or bicyclist is frequently involved. For all four states for all years studied, the proportion of RTOR pedestrian or bicyclist crashes to all RTOR crashes was 22 percent.
  
  
• RTOR pedestrian and bicyclist crashes usually involve injury. Ninety-three percent of RTOR pedestrian or bicyclist crashes resulted in injury.
• Slightly less than half (44 percent) of the fatal RTOR crashes involve a pedestrian, 10 percent a bicyclist, and 33 percent two vehicles.

So, RTOR is mostly an issue in cities and banning it is most effective at those intersections with lots of pedestrians and cyclists; but it's not a magic bullet. The number of lives it will save and injuries it will prevent is low. But the whole point of Vision Zero is to take all the steps we can to save lives. 

Also, no one should interview John Townsend with the belief that he is operating in good faith. That's craziness. 

The history of mandatory bicycle bell laws in DC

Back in 2013, DC took the unusual step of allowing bikes to be ridden in the District without a bicycle bell, which is something the District had required for over 125 years  - and something a lot of other cities had required. The argument for no longer mandating them was that they were an add-on that did nothing for safety. 

The regulation dated back to 1884 when the DC Police updated their regulations to include several about bicycles, notably that bicycles have a bell or gong that is "sounded by the revolution of a wheel." The idea was to set a regulation similar to that of sleighs, which like bicycles, moved quietly and often surprised pedestrians at night. It seems that bicyclists had themselves to blame for the regulation as the Capital Bicycle Club (CBC) had written the District Commissioners in 1881 asking for rules requiring them as well as lights. 

By 1887, the CBC had changed its tune. The CBC noted that they no longer required members to have bells (or lamps) because they found them to be ineffective and asked the District to change the regulations of both. They argued that the rule, which was widely ignored, would create a public nuisance of constant ringing if actually followed. They also said that the law was unclear as to whether or not the bells were needed in the daytime, or when they needed to be rung at all. In one crash they highlighted, the operator of a wagon didn't stop when he saw a cyclists, hit him and then said he didn't need to stop because the cyclist didn't ring their bell. The CBC added that the "alarm of a bell is construed as an unauthorized order to clear the road" and has the effect of startling a pedestrian, which might make a collision more likely instead of less.(1)  In order to protest the law, one cyclist spent a day riding loops around the District Building with cowbells attached to his bike.(2)

By the end of the summer their advocacy had had some success. The regulations were updated to allow cyclists to decide when to ring the bell or gong. The requirement for lamps at night remained, but cyclists were given more leeway in choosing which design of light to use (not just the "bulls-eye" lamp).(3)

In 1888, local cyclists - this time the DC division of the League of American Wheelmen - again asked that the rules requiring lights and bells be removed. They argued that horsemen and private vehicle owners were not required to have them, and that it is better for cyclists to avoid pedestrians than to tell them to move out of the way.(4) They tried again in 1892, arguing that the lights were useless and expensive and the bells made cyclists careless.(5)

In the years in between, various people complained that the law was under-enforced or over-enforced, but it doesn't seem that cyclists continued to advocate for its removal. Since the law passed in 2013, there hasn't been much complaining about the lack of bells - but this being DC, there has been some. 

[I also learned that in the Palisades neighborhood, there used to be a velodrome called International Athletic Park and people came from far and wide to ride there. It was reportedly built by a real estate developer name William C. Clark, which is I suspect who Clark Street in the area is named for. The picture below shows it's location I think].

1. "Bicycles After Dark" The Evening Star, 6 July 1887  
2. "He Carried a Cowbell" The Evening Star, 28 July 1887
3. "Revised Police Regulations" The Evening Star, 14 July 1887
4. "Bicycle Bells and Lights" The Washington Post, 2 August 1888
5. "Bicycle Bells and Lights" The Washington Post, 12 July 1892

Riverfront at West Hyattsville project to upgrade section of NW Branch Trail

Between the Northwest Branch Trail and the West Hyattsville Metro station, developers are building a multifamily unit and townhouse development. In order to meet the storm water management requirements, a section of the adjacent NW Branch Trail has been temporarily closed so that dirt can be removed from the area and underground compensatory storage can be built. When the work is complete, a better trail with lighting, a new bridge and connections to the new development will be built. 

The project will include a community park along the trail with an amphitheater, an expanded trail where the existing trail is (though shifted a bit) and new paths leading from the trail to the community. The trail will also get trail makers, LED lighting and emergency call stations.

Away from the trail, the project will include an 8' wide hiker biker trail (although elsewhere they call it a bike lane or a sidewalk) along the northside of Little Branch Run, which is the long diagonal street across the development, a 10' wide promenade (also called a sidewalk) along River Terrace Road, the road adjacent to the trail area, and a direct connection to the Metro (not seen on the image above). 

As mentioned before, the trail is being closed because the property needs the area for storm water management. 

The majority of this park space is actually owned by the Maryland-National Capital Park and Planning Commission (M-NCPPC) Parks Department. It was dedicated to the Parks Department from the subject property in 1957. The applicant and the Parks Department have come to an agreement where the applicant may use the parkland for some of their stormwater management features, which is crucial because the project site lies within the 100-year floodplain. Properties that lie in the floodplain are required to take extra measures to manage stormwater and mitigate against a higher flooding risk. As a result, an arrangement has been made where the applicant can use dirt from the M-NCPPC property to raise the site out of the floodplain. The applicant will then incorporate underground compensatory storage for the site on the M-NCPPC parcel. In exchange, the parcel in question will be turned into a greenway with improvements made to the adjacent trail. M-NCPPC will retain ownership of this site with a memorandum of understanding in place for the applicant to control the maintenance of the stormwater facility.

As mentioned, the recently closed the trail resulting in a 6-9 month detour (don't worry, no stairs) which can be seen below.