The Greater Washington Partnership recently released a Blueprint for Regional Mobility, a transportation plan for the super-region. It is a transportation plan, one that would likely lead to more and better biking, but it's also a plan for moving towards Vision Zero and Sustainability.
Most notable for cyclists is that one of the dozen or so actions is to complete the Baltimore Greenway Trails and Capital Trails networks and to establish a Richmond Trail Network strategy.
Connected trail systems can lessen demand on the roadway network, improve connections to jobs and activity centers, increase regional economic activity, contribute to healthy communities, and enhance access to the outdoors and our iconic parks and landscapes in both rural and urban areas. Maryland, the District, and Virginia have more than 1,000 multi-use trail miles, with major nationally-recognized trails such as the East Coast Greenway, the C&O Canal Towpath, the Anacostia Tributary Trails, the Capital Crescent Trail, the Mount Vernon Trail, the W&OD Trail, and the Virginia Capital Trail.
Yet, despite considerable investments, the region’s trails do not form coherent and connected regional networks in the Baltimore, Washington, and Richmond metro areas. In many instances, the trails also do not provide seamless connections to non-trail bicycle and pedestrian networks. Federal, state, and local governments should collaborate with trails groups and private entities to speed up the delivery of the Baltimore Greenway and the Capital Trails Network, and establish a trail connecting activity centers from Ashland to Richmond to Petersburg with the 52-mile Virginia Capital Trail.
Many commute trips are less than five miles, a distance most can bike. In addition, many non-commuting trips can be completed efficiently by biking or walking if safe options exist. Trail connections to essential destinations such as jobs and transit stops can lower demand on the region’s roadway network, which reduces congestion.
However, the lack of trail connectivity diminishes the region’s ability to conveniently overcome man-made barriers, such as roads, to access jobs, schools, and outdoor opportunities. This lack of trail connectivity encourages consumers to drive rather than complete trips by bike or foot, limits greenspace for recreation, and isolates communities.
The Capital Region already benefits from clusters of locally and regionally connected trails in some areas. A few critical investments would create a network of trails—creating a sum far greater than its parts.
You can't argue with any of that. Richmond in particular has some great untapped trail opportunities, as it has been an historic rail hub. Many of those rail line have been shut down, but could be re-purposed for trails. A partial map of abandoned railroads around Richmond can be seen to the right (existing trails are in blue).
But beyond just supporting the trails, the plan supports better transit, increased density, a downtown DC congestion charge and ending free parking - all things that would make biking better.
It notes that a Metro study that included a DC congestion zone, better priced parking and better bike connectivity to Metro stations would result in a 25% increase in transit mode share. It's hard to imagine it wouldn't also lead to an increase in bicycle mode share and a reduction in road fatalities too.
So, when some people write that
Some WABA members also would like to see the District charge motorists a toll just for entering the city.
They should know it's not just WABA members. It's WMATA. And the Greater Washington Partnership, and the groups that signed on to their plan including the Greater Washington Board of Trade and the Prince George’s and Montgomery County Chambers of Commerce, [They should also know that on one is proposing tolls just for entering the District]
Their blueprint is also silent on creating on-street bike/micromobility facilities that are safe and comfortable for all ages and abilities.
Their blueprint also has some weasel-wording about creating choices for motorists through a network of tolled options yada yada yada. They support toll lane widenings, basically.
So yes, they support some good stuff. But no way that I'm going to rely on yet another business transpo lobby to help deliver anything approaching Vision Zero. They are just more of our default "Yes, and" approach to regional transpo planning.
Posted by: darren | October 17, 2019 at 09:33 AM
$360k in TAP funds just granted for design of 5.5 segment of Baltimore Greenway.
Posted by: Jan Hardesty | October 18, 2019 at 08:01 AM
"So, when some people write that
Some WABA members also would like to see the District charge motorists a toll just for entering the city."
Sorry, who wrote that? Even if I just want to do some light hate-reading.
Posted by: drumz | October 21, 2019 at 12:52 PM
sorry, that quote should have had this link.
Posted by: washcycle | October 21, 2019 at 08:26 PM
oof,
" Let’s try one question: Is it right for bicyclists to cut to the head of a line of cars at a stoplight, then poke along, impeding traffic?
The wrong answer could cost you a driver’s license.
(According to biker law, the correct answer is yes.)"
That's not 'biker law'. It's just the law.
The rest isn't better but that's just straight up deceptive.
Posted by: drumz | October 23, 2019 at 12:34 PM