TheWashCycle

Del. Norton hosting roundtable on bicycle and pedestrian funding tonight

Delegate Eleanor Holmes Norton is hosting a round table discussion tonight on “How New Federal Funds Can Help Residents Bike and Walk with Less Risk and More Pleasure”

The roundtable will hear from local bike and pedestrian leaders and D.C. residents on the best ways to use new federal funding for bike and pedestrian projects that she got included in the new surface transportation bill.  Norton was one of the “Big Four” House Transportation leaders who wrote the FAST Act.  As Ranking Member of the House Highways and Transit Subcommittee, Norton developed a strategy to overcome Republican resistance to bike and pedestrian funding in the FAST Act that they wanted devoted solely to roads.  Norton has invited officials from the District Department of Transportation Office and the National Park Service (NPS) to sit on a panel with her to hear testimony from the D.C. bicycle and pedestrian community.

WABA appears to be approaching this differently. Instead a discussion about how to spend money, they're calling for a discussion of bicycle and pedestrian issues in relation to the federal government. That discussion is probably more useful, since a discussion of how to best spend money is a bit wonky when it works, and contentious when it doesn't. The issues they list are

• How are National Park Police, Secret Service, Capitol Police and other federal policing agencies interacting with bicyclists around Washington DC?
• How are Federal agencies headquartered in the District helping or hindering the District's goal of Vision Zero?
• How is NPS managing trails on national park land that serve as significant transportation corridors for bicyclists?

I'd even add some to that. Not only asking how are federal agencies hindering Vision Zero, but hindering efforts to make biking better. Things like allowing CaBi docks on the Capital grounds, reopening E Street south of the White House to cyclists, allowing bike commuters to use Arlington Cemetery, expanding the bicycle commuter benefit and allowing its use to pay for bikeshare fees, allowing a cash-out option for federal employees who currently get free parking, etc..will make biking better, even if maybe they don't help with Vision Zero. 

Invited panelists: 

Leif Dormsjo, Director, District Department of Transportation 
Bob Vogel, Regional Director, National Park Service
Greg Billing, Executive Director, WABA
Representatives from the Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Councils

Audience members will have a chance to participate by asking questions of the panel.

Date: Thursday October 27, 2016
Time: 6:00 PM to 8:00 PM

Location: 2167 Rayburn House Office Building Washington DC 20515

Arlington's NFATC's Master Plan update is a chance to make it less of a barrier

The National Foreign Affairs Training Center in Arlington wants to update their Master Plan so that they can expand and enhance 6 buildings, add a new parking structure and improve some of the security features (most importantly the fence). GSA has started the scoping process for an Environmental Assessment they intend to prepare for the Master Plan. Comments are due in August 19th and there won't be another opportunity to comment until the EA is completed. 

The facility currently has a bike trail from S. Utah Street to S. Quincy with a spur to 1st Place. Arlington County maintains the 12-foot wide trail west of George Mason (the West Parcel) and the State Department maintains the 10-foot wide trail, east of George Mason (the East Parcel).

I used to bike George Mason Drive through here several times a week, but haven't been out there in a few years, nor did I have much of an opinion about the site at the time, but looking at it I have two suggestion.

1. The trail currently passes underneath George Mason through a tunnel (though it involves dismounting and climbing down and then back up stairs). Nonetheless, you can't get to the trail from George Mason because there is fencing separating the street from that area. This seems a bit silly since the area on the other side of the fence is not secure - you can bike or walk right up to it.  They should remove this unnecessary fencing and create connections from the trail to George Mason on both sides of the road.
2. Since the perimeter fencing is likely to be removed anyway, why not push it back about 12 feet from S. Quincy to 3rd Street South and extend the trail to there (red line on image below). Those sides of the facility are all parking lots anyway (so not much of a security threat, I suspect) and it would create a complete trail connection to S. Glebe Road. 

What else am I missing? If you ride around there and have a suggestion (biking through the facility?) leave a comment here and send a comment in.

Army proposes banning almost all biking in Arlington National Cemetery

In May, the US Army proposed new rules on the development, operation, maintenance, and administration of the Army National Cemeteries, which includes Arlington National Cemetery. Currently, Arlington Cemetery allows limited access to bicycles in an eastbound (downhill) direction only. Identification and a helmet are required. In addition, I believe that anyone visiting a grave may ride their bike to it. 

Newly proposed rules would change that. The new regulations would allow no one to 

Ride a bicycle or similar conveyance in an Army National Military Cemetery, except with a proper pass issued by the Executive Director to visit a gravesite or niche. An individual visiting a relative's gravesite or niche may be issued a temporary pass by the Executive Director to proceed directly to and from the gravesite or niche on a bicycle or similar vehicle or conveyance.

This would put an end to the eastbound bicycle commuter traffic. In addition it appears that people visiting the Cemetery by bicycle will have to get a temporary pass each time they visit. This contrasts with those visiting by car who can be issued a permanent visitor pass (I have to one to visit my dad's grave, but I've not tried to bike in with it).  The section on permanent passes mentions "vehicles" and a bicycle is vehicle, so maybe I'm wrong about that (I don' know how, or if, they define vehicle in the regulations).

(2) Only the following categories of vehicles may be permitted access to Arlington National Cemetery roadways and issued a permanent or temporary pass from the Executive Director:

(i) Official Government vehicles being used on official Government business.

(ii) Vehicles carrying persons on official Cemetery business.

(iii) Vehicles forming part of an authorized funeral procession and authorized to be part of that procession.

(iv) Vehicles carrying persons visiting the Arlington National Cemetery gravesites, niches, or memorial areas of relatives or loved ones interred, inurned, or memorialized within Arlington National Cemetery.

(v) Arlington National Cemetery and National Park Service maintenance vehicles.

(vi) Vehicles of contractors who are authorized to perform work within Arlington National Cemetery.

(vii) Concessionaire tour buses authorized by the Executive Director to operate in Arlington National Cemetery.

(viii) Vehicles of employees of ANMC as authorized by the Executive Director.

This is, of course, the exact opposite of what I called for in 2011 when the Wright Gate was temporarily closed. 

Update: The Arlington County Board submitted a comment in which they only opposed this change. [And all the other comments are in opposition of this rule change too]

We respectfully disagree, however, that the proposed limitations on the use of bicycles (as provided in Section 553.33(c)(8)) within the cemetery are necessary to accomplish that goal.

The Proposed Rulemaking seeks to regulate behavior to ensure that only conduct that comports with "proper standards of decorum and decency while in an Army National Military Cemetery" are exhibited there. WE BELIEVE there is nothing inherent in the use of a bicycle that conflicts with this objective. The proposed rules do not limit the movement of pedestrians across the cemetery. While we understand and accept the proposal in Section 553.33(c)(7), to limit "recreational activities", there is no need for an additional prohibition on a bicyclist who is riding their bicycle in a measured, respectful way, as a means of transportation, traversing one point outside the cemetery, to another point, outside the cemetery. Bicyclists should be able to traverse the cemetery the same way as pedestrians who can transit the cemetery grounds moving from one point outside the cemetery to another outside.

In addition, visitors to the area will often use bicycles as a mode of transportation to get around and visit important sites. To limit their access to Arlington National Cemetery by bicycle is to restrict their experience of this important monument to those who died in the military. Arlington National Cemetery should be experienced not only as a place where we ennoble our most prestigious military honorees, but as a place that speaks to the vastness of the dedication of human life to the ideals on which our country was founded. The vastness cannot be fully appreciated without taking in large sections of the cemetery in a way that can only be accomplished in a vehicle. IT SEEMS CLEAR TO US THAT a few bicycles are no more offensive than the "[c]oncessionaire tour buses" that would be authorized by the Proposed Rulemaking. WE WOULD LIKE TO NOTE the results of a recent survey of 467 service members, military spouses and retirees who live, work or utilize services provided on the adjacent Joint Base Myer/Henderson Hall. Those users were dissatisfied with the availability of parking at Joint Base and a majority expressed support for re-opening Henry Gate to pedestrian access. Almost half of the survey respondents expressed an interest in the Capital Bikeshare program. Their transportation options are reflective of many visitors to Arlington Cemetery, as well. We request that Section 553.33(c)(8) be struck from the Proposed Rulemaking. Thank you for considering our comments. Libby Garvey Chair, Arlington County Board

Up until 1978, biking was allowed on all the roads in Arlington. But "whistle blowing gangs of youth", reportedly, were riding around disturbing visitors so they put an end to it. They did allow for bike commuting along a northern route to allow the ~50 bike commuters who were using it then to continue to do so. A group called the "Federal Bicycle Council", which represented federal bike commuters, protested but to no avail. The route the Army left open was more hilly than other options. 

Martin Stutsman, a Food and Drug Administration employee and bike commuter recently tried to pass out notices of the cemetery's bike plans to other bicycle commuters, but said he was stopped by cemetery police. 

One of Arlington's major bicycle commuter routes on bike paths along Rte. 50 (Arlington Boulevard) now dead ends at Fort Myer, which partially surrounds the cemetery. Cyclists are forced onto major high-speed commuter roads during hours when they cannot go through the fort and cemetery.

However, Arlington is expected to build a bypass bike route around the northern edge of the fort and cemetery this fall. The $81,000 bike path already has been funded and now is awaiting state Highway Department approval.

I guess that is the old path along the north side of Arlington Blvd. 

The country also has long-range plans for a southern cemetery bypass bike trail and already has funds for a bicycle-pedestrian bridge over the George Washington Memorial Parkway connecting Rosslyn streets with Roosevelt Island and Roosevelt Bridge, according to the country's chief public works planner Kenneth Hook.

The Park Service is expected to approve the bridge and has plans of its own to extend the George Washington Memorial Parkway bike path from Memorial Bridge to Roosevelt Island. But no changes are expected between Roosevelt Bridge and Spout Run until a highway study of that area is done this year or next, according to Park Service spokeswoman Sandra Alley.

Huh, the trail used to end at Memorial Bridge, who knew. BTW, that trail around the south is only now being built. 

Bikepartisan support for the study to add CaBi to the Capital Grounds

Rep. Blumenauer (D-OR) introduced an amendment to require the Architect of the Capitol to study the feasibility of adding Capital Bikeshare stations to the Capitol grounds and to provide $100k to pay for that study. Rep Tom Graves (R-GA) and Rep. Don Beyer (D-VA) from just across the Potomac supported the bill and there was no opposition. CaBi was spoken of it such glowing terms It must've been blushing.

Architect of the Capitol, one of two new Bicycle Friendly Businesses in DC area

The League of American Bicyclists released the 2015 Bicycle Friendly Businesses list and two local "businesses" made the list: The Architect of the Capitol and Kevin H Posey, The Biking Realtor Coldwell Banker Residential of Alexandria. [Also A-1 Cycling in Manassas, but that's pretty far out]. All of these businesses are now bronze.

It's kind of odd to award the AOC a designation since the Capitol itself is somewhat not bicycle friendly, though that may be due to the Capitol Police or the Sergeant-At-Arms. For example, there still isn't a CaBi station anywhere on Capitol grounds, even though there were plans to add one near the Capitol South Metro as far back as 2012.

There is one at Penn and 3rd, but that's outside the Capitol grounds. 

In addition, barriers erected after 9-11 have made the Capitol grounds less bike friendly, and many of those impacts have not been addressed.

DOI need not ban cycling on Rock Creek Parkway

While most people focussed on the substantial cuts to bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure, the new Transportation Bill also contained a provision that could potentially reduce cyclists right to the road on federal lands. 

(d) BICYCLE SAFETY.—The Secretary of the appropriate Federal land management agency shall prohibit the use of bicycles on each federally owned road that has a speed limit of 30 miles per hour or greater and an adjacent paved path for use by bicycles within 100 yards of the road unless the Secretary determines that the bicycle level of service on that roadway is rated B or higher.

At first glance, that sounds like Rock Creek Parkway.

When the US Senate first started considering this provision, cycling advocates pointed out that its language tracked the mandatory sidepath rules that have been gradually eliminated from state laws since the 1970s, because they do not promote safety.  John S. Allen worried suggested that "it would ban bicycles on a road even if the path is unusable." 

The provision survived in the final bill.  There is no evidence that Congress even considered the possiblity that banning bikes on roads with trails would make cyclists less safe, and that's a good thing.  Here's why.

The Secretary of Interior (and other land management agencies) have a lot more discretion than the typical police officer or district court judge to decide what a statute like this means, especially if there is no clear legislative intent.  This statute does not even ban bikes from certain roads, but rather directs the Secretary to do so.  So it's up to the Secretary to decide what that law should mean. 

We've heard rumors that legislative staffers were mad at cyclists holding up traffic on Rock Creek Parkway, and that they did not care whether the bill would compromise safety; they just wanted bikes off the road.  But rumors about what staffers wanted do not equal statutory intent.  The Secretary has the duty to determine what the statute means, and move forward on that basis.

Because the heading of the provision says "Bicycle Safety", the Secretary should conclude that the entire intent of Congress was to increase bicycle safety.  The exclusion for especially safe roads (level service of B) further shows that the intent was safety.  The bill says nothing about holding up traffic.  So that objective has no place in the Secretary's evaluation of what Congress intended.

Therefore, the Secretary need only ban bicycling on roads where doing so enhances safety.  Requiring cyclists to ride on narrow paths or paths with sharp turns or poor pavement would clearly not help safety.  Nor would requiring cyclists to ride on paths with heavy pedestrian use.  If pedestrian use is extremely high (e.g. Rock Creek Trail), then the path is not really a "paved path for use by bicycles" but rather a pedestrian walkway, or perhaps a hiker-biker trail.  Conversely, a path designed for the exclusive use of cyclists would be a paved path for use by bicycles.  The Secretary would also have the discretion to decide that if a path does not meet AASHTO standards for safety at the prevailing (85-percentile) speed of cyclists, that it is not a "paved path for use by bicycles" 

Summarizing:  When this "mandatory sidepath" provision was under consideration, cycling activists worried, reasonably enough, that the provision could force cyclists off many federal roads and onto poorly designed and maintained sidepaths.  But now that the bill has passed, we need to stop suggesting that this was what Congress actully did, and instead push for a safety-based policy by the Department of Interior (DOI), which would hopefully be adopted by other agencies). 

A district court construing a state law might not have the ability to read the word "safe" into "paved path for use by bicycles."  Had the federal statute simply banned bikes rather than direct the Secretary to do so, there might be little discretion,  But here we have a Congressional charge to an agency head to prohibit cycling from certain roadways, which inherently vests the Secretary with more discretion, as long as the Secretary is being reasobable.  And who would argue that optimizing safety on federal lands is not reasonable?

Individual park superintendants are generally not lawyers, and they may read the statute narrowly without being aware of the context in which provisions like this apply.  So let's hope that DOI or National Park Service headquarters provides guidance to the parks, to avoid unnecessarily cramped interpretations of the new law.

I have not had occasion to ride the trail along Rock Creek Parkway between Massachusetts and Virginia avenues in several years.  What do you think?  Would banning bikes on that part of the parkway create a safety problem on weekends?

(Jim Titus represents Prince Georges County on Maryland's Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee (MBAPC) and is on WABA's board of directors.  The opinions here do not reflect the official views of either WABA or MBPAC.)

Friday Morning Commute - Juno

Check out the Juno launch today at 11:34am

• The Office of Planning recently presented draft recommendations to rebuild Maryland avenue from 4th Street to 12th Street, SW. This includes decking over the railroad tracks from 7th to 12th. Though the extended road for Maryland Ave doesn't appear to have any bike facilities, it does appear to have a lot of cyclists on it.
• ANC 5C postponed its R Street bike lane vote until DDOT has time to meet with neighborhood groups.
• The base commander for JBAB commutes to work by bike and he would like to start a bike fleet for on-base transportation (though funding restrictions make it difficult). That only makes it more confusing as to why they don't reopen the base to bike commuters who wish to pass through or allow the public to access the waterfront trail much as they do at the Navy Yard.
• Arlington's CaBi expansion is slipping back in the calendar a little bit "This appears to be primarily a function of release dates for grant funds and the order process. The manufacturer of CaBi bikes doesn't keep any inventory, so there's a significant lag time between order placement and actual delivery. "
• MDOT and SHA expect to draft guidelines for "Bicycles May Use Full Lane" signs and ask for input from cycling activists, residents and others by the end of this fall.
• Germantown bike thieves caught on tape. Now, they need to be caught for real.