TheWashCycle

Commuters can earn rewards and avoid traffic with new incenTrip mobile app

From a press release

Commuter Connections and the Maryland Transportation Institute at the University of Maryland, with technology development funding from the U.S. Department of Energy’s Advanced Research Project Agency – Energy (ARPA-E), will launch incenTrip, a new mobile app that allows commuters in the Washington D.C. region to save time, money, and fuel, while earning rewards for planning trips.

The incenTrip app recommends the best travel mode, departure time, and route based on both real-time traffic prediction data and user personal preferences to help commuters avoid both day-to-day congestion and traffic jams caused by accidents, work zones, special events, and adverse weather conditions.

With the app, commuters can earn rewards, including gift cards and cash, every time they plan trips to and from work, avoid traffic, or use alternatives to drive-alone commuting, such as carpooling, taking transit, walking, and biking. The app provides users a fun and game-like environment, where they can accomplish customized weekly goals, win challenges, and invite friends to participate.

The launch event of the app will include an overview of the app development, demonstration of key features, and discussion of regional impacts, such as reducing congestion and vehicle emissions. Reporters will have the opportunity to ask questions and be among the first users to try out the app.

Here's more from the Washington Post back in 2018.

I haven't yet used it, but I wonder if it lets you combine metrorail with biking, or bike sharing or is it like Google Maps and if you choose transit it assumes you can use the train or bus or walk but that's it. 

County Council members challenges Planning Board's CCT decision

Three Montgomery County Council members are questioning the local Planning Board’s decision to abandon a temporary road-lane reduction and realign the Capital Crescent Trail’s crossing with Little Falls Parkway in Bethesda.

In June, the planning board voted to get rid of the road diet on Little Falls Parkway and move the Capital Crescent Trail to the intersection. This month om Hucker, Evan Glass and Hans Riemer of the county council wrote a letter to the planning board saying that it flies in the face of the Vision Zero commitment. I'm not sure how much this will do, since the planning board doesn't have to listen to the Council, and it's not even an official position of the council, but it's nice. 

It's worth noting that Park & Planning commissioned a traffic study, which generated best practice recommendations. It recommended the road diet. 

Installation of the interim road diet along Little Falls Parkway approaching the Capital Crescent Trail was quantitatively shown to significantly improve safety at the trail crossing while also minimizing adverse impacts to vehicular operations along the corridor. The interim road diet has eliminated the multi-lane threat, slowed vehicle speeds through this segment of Little Falls Parkway, and increased visibility between trail users and drivers....

Unlike all other alternatives, signalization of the trail crossing introduces delay to trail users (approximately 30 seconds on average), where they currently have none. Our analysis showed that the additional signal phase for trail users is also projected to increase travel times along the corridor for vehicular traffic by approximately 13 seconds over pre-road diet conditions. These increases in delay for all users may result in non-compliance in the form of violations of the “no right turn on red” restriction for vehicles and “jay walking” by trail users, potentially degrading the safety benefits of signalization.

Conclusion: By eliminating the multi-lane threat, reducing vehicle speeds and increasing motorist and trail user awareness, the road diet has been effective in improving safety for trail users. Significant reduction in conflicts and crashes from 12 in the two-year prior to the road diet down to 5 in the two years post-road diet. “Severity” of conflicts appears reduced due to slower vehicle speeds. Compliance of drivers yielding to trail users is very high and wait times for trail users are very low.

City officials say the road change won’t happen until at least another year, and it's possible the planning board could change its mind. 

In other CCT news, Purple Line Transit Partners says that the 4.3 mile expansion to the trail being built in conjunction with the Purple Line could open before the Purple Line. 

“We could conceivably start looking at ways to open the trail before the Purple Line is open,” he said. “There could be times we have to close it again when construction crews have to come in and finish some landscaping.”

I don’t think they’re saying the CCT will open before the Purple Line construction is finished, but that it COULD open, at times, before the Purple Line is running (because there will be some time between completion of construction and operation). 

WB&A trail completion in sight, expansion being seriously considered

I wrote a post on GGW Washington about this. 

In search of a safer Mount Vernon Trail, comment now

Last month, the NPS hosted a safety meeting on the GW Parkway/Vt. Vernon Trail and VA State Senator Scott Surovell submitted some very well thought out comments. He notes that the two main problems are traffic volume, which is up following the 2005 round of BRAC, and speed. He therefore supports

Speed cameras - Yes. A 100 times yes. He reminds NPS that former congress member Dick Armey (TX) and VA Governor Jim Gilmore complained about them in 2001, and that they were then removed. But he points out what many said at the time - they were wrong. He proposes a concession contract to get around rules about spending and revenue. 

A shocking 70-80% of drivers speed and NPS did not even measure speeds at the 35-mph stretch between Belle Haven Road and Belleview Boulevard.

Careful use of traffic diets - he supports them, but wants NPS to be cautious about them, with some experiments first

Mount Vernon Trail - The trail is unsafe. It's too narrow and has too many turns and blind corners. People are getting injured frequently. Root heave is making the surface unsafe. He recommends maintenance and perhaps a separate study.  In the short term he recommends letting cyclists back in the road - at least on the slower portions or where traffic is light; and closing part of the Parkway on weekends as is done in Rock Creek Park. Great suggestions. Back in 2006, WABA met with NPS to discuss ways to make the trail safer, but a study of the complete trail and of a possible expansion north, with an eye towards improvements and safety would be a great thing. 

Increased Enforcement - Calls for more enforcement of speed limits on the roadway and on the trail (15mph if you're wondering) and for a ban on e-scooters on the trail. [I disagree on the scooter ban]. 

There are other suggestions I've omitted because they don't really matter to cyclists and trail users, but lots of them are good ideas. 

Surovell and FABB both argue that the road has become unsafe, largely due to speeding. 'FABB is looking more for speed cameras and round-a-bouts, and a road diet as a third solution. Road diets usually take away a driving lane and have more bike and pedestrian spaces. Either way, these will impede the government employee driving to the office at Fort Belvoir." FABB and the Alexandria BPAC are doing a ride and picnic on August 18th in conjunction with the safety study for those interested in getting a hands-on informed opinion. 

Comments are being accepted until Aug 21. 

DDOT Presents the Palisades Trolley Trail

Last month, DDOT presented options on the Palisades Trolley Trail that envisions a trail connecting neighborhoods along the Potomac River with Georgetown and with the Capital Crescent Trail. How good those connections will be, and how much the trail will cost, will depend on which options are chosen.

The Palisades Trolley Trail is a proposed path along the long-abandoned trolley bed of the Cabin John Trolley and it has a long history. That trolley once went from the Georgetown Car Barn to Glen Echo and the Cabin John Bridge. After the streetcar ceased operations in 1962 the rail bed sat vacant, but there were initial plans to build a road, the Palisades Parkway, on it. Neighbors started using the ROW to store boats, campers and cars and others used it to dump trash illegally, so the city told Roy O. Chalk, the owner, to do something about it and he built a fence to block local access.  Neighbors complained about that too, so the District started making plans to buy it for a trail.  By 1976 local planners had penciled in a bike trail on the right-of-way all the way to Glen Echo. A few years later, the District decided they needed the land to build a water main and they planned to build the two projects together. But a 1981 NIMBY operation led to the DC portion of the trail being shelved based on a close neighborhood vote. Despite the setback, District planners continued to include a trail on the ROW in several planning documents over the following 40 years. DC condemned the land in 1982 and bought it in 1983 for $8 million for the water main.  The Maryland portion was dropped from planning documents in the recent Montgomery County Bicycle Plan because planners thought it was duplicative of the MacArthur Boulevard bike path, but they still plan a connection from the Capital Crescent Trail to the Brookmont neighborhood. 

Map of planned bike routes in 1976

But now, like John Rambo and Emperor Palpatine, the trail is back from the 80's. 

WMATA, which got the trestle and other property after requesting guardianship of it from the courts in 1997, recently decided to raze the streetcar trestle over Foundry Branch which has become a hazard and closed the trail underneath it. It is the last of the trestles in DC and the potential loss of it, along with a growing advocacy push for the trail, prompted DDOT to dust off the idea and begin a feasibility study. The Historic Preservation Review Board (HPRB) denied WMATA a raze permit last fall, which they appealed, and in March the Mayor's Agent issued a continuance on the appeal until October 1st for DDOT to finish their study. 

The trail presented at the second public meeting would be an 11' wide trail of various materials running from Georgetown to Galena Place. Most of the trail would have either a crushed gravel surface or a porous pavement, but the short portion east of Foundry Branch would be paved with asphalt. The trail would have the usual amenities but in the area next to the reservoir, where the District owns more land, there would be park-style amenities like benches and gardens. The trail would cost about $4 million not counting bridges ($6-$9 million) a connection to the Capital Crescent Trail (CCT) ($500k) or the Arizona Avenue Bridge project. 

At Foundry Branch, they identified four options to get from Foxhall Road to the city. One uses a widened sidewalk along Canal Street and the others use a new bridge over the branch. For those that go over the branch, one ramps down to Canal, another connects to Fowler's Road and a 3rd goes over Fowler's at the old streetcar abutment and then along the land between Canal and the University to connect to Prospect Street. The last option, option 4, is my preferred option (though it's the most expensive and difficult one). 

For the Foundry Branch Bridge, there are 4 options. One is to not use it and allow WMATA to raze it. The other three rehabilitate parts and replace others. Costs of the bridge range from $2.1 to $6.3 million. But even the no bridge option costs $1.6-$1.7 million. Other bridges would be needed at Reservoir Road, Clark Place and Maddox Branch, and these would cost ~$2 each. 

At Arizona Avenue, new sidewalks, crosswalks and several hundred feet of trail could connect the Palisades Trail at a rebuilt Arizona Avenue Bridge to the CCT for another half million. 

There's still a big lift to get this trail built. Agreements are needed with NPS, WMATA, the Army Corps of Engineers and Georgetown University (who reportedly does not want to trail in their front lawn). The trail has to accommodate PEPCO and DC Water. Bridges can't be built on the water main and utilities might need to be moved. There are places where erosion has created steep slopes that will require significant earth work to deal with. The bridge is in bad shape, but parts of it are still good and can hold the weight of the trail. And then of course, there's the money and the raze appeal. 

DDOT will work on a Final Design Concept and then in October (after the hold that the Mayor's Agent placed on the raze appeal has expired) they'll issue an Environmental Memorandum Report with a determination of feasibility to be issued in December. I don't know if the plan is to try and push the appeal out until after that or they're willing to take ownership of the trestle at this time or what the plan is, but I hope they have one. 

I love the whole thing and think it would be worth it, especially with the CCT connection and the route to Prospect Street, but we'll see. 

DDOT is still taking feedback, which can be sent to [email protected]

17 year old cyclist hit and killed on Old Georgetown Road

A 17 year old cyclist riding on the sidewalk along Old Georgetown Road fell off his bike and into the road yesterday. He was struck and died. This incident, in addition to being a tragedy, also exemplifies why Vision Zero is needed.

Barring some new facts about the driver, this will likely be chalked up as "human error" on the part of the cyclist, but in reality, the errors came in design of the road long before the crash occurred. And the idea of VZ is that the burden of avoid fatalities should rest on the shoulders of those who design and built the system, not those who use it. 

Old Georgetown Road is a 7-lane road with narrow sidewalks, no bike facilities and no shoulders. And the sidewalk is further narrowed by no parking signs, foliage, dirt and, yesterday, trash set outside for pickup. All with the added obstacle of a driveway curb cut. [I believe this is the spot where the crash occurred and you can see the steep sidewalk angle and the no parking sign right there together.]  The victim was likely not helped by the fact that the driver was in an SUV instead of a sedan (this is another choice). 

This was the first bicycle fatality in the area since Dave Salovesh's and the first in Montgomery County since Jaimie Caceres in November. 

This road is not someplace where cyclists should be unexpected. Just a few blocks farther south, the North Bethesda Trolley Trail runs along side Old Georgetown and this crash occurred just outside a school zone. Furthermore, the County's new bike plan recommends a side path on this section. As it is now though, it's wholly inadequate. 

Montgomery County committed to Vision Zero in 2017 and is ending it's first two-year action plan this year. The goal was to cut traffic deaths by 35% this year and to zero by 2030. I'm not sure how well they're doing thus far, maybe someone else does. 

Prince George's county recently became the latest jurisdiction to commit to Vision Zero. They haven't put their plan together yet, but last I saw the goal was to cut fatalities by 50% by 2030 and to zero by 2040. Of course, the state of Maryland just set a goal of zero by 2030, so that seems to be in conflict. For reference, DC's is by 2024 and Alexandria and Arlington are aiming for 2028. I don't think Virginia has a Vision Zero goal. 

Yesterday I was on Kojo to talk about Vision Zero and while it was encouraging to have the county (where I probably do half or more of my biking) make the commitment to Vision Zero, there were other things that were not encouraging.  Prince George’s County’s Director of Public Works and Transportation Terry Bellamy still talked about human error as the cause of crashes instead of design issues.  He made it sound as though Vision Zero is just a rebranding of the efforts they were already doing, the ones that make PG County the highest road fatality county in the state (by numbers, not rate). He also said that "Distractive walking is just as bad as distractive driving" which I'm willing to be generous and assume was just clumsy statement not that he sees them as equivalent. 

It's crashes like yesterday's that shows how bad design is such a large part of the problem, and how far we have to go. Local and state governments are committing to fixing these problems and making our roads safe, and time will tell if they have the backbone for it, but so far there are as many reasons to be discouraged as encouraged.