TheWashCycle

Charles Allen on Kojo on Friday

Martin Austermuhle filled in for Kojo Nnamdi on Friday with guests Tom Sherwood and Councilmember Charles Allen. This was the same day as the Rally for Streets that Don't Kill People and so the subject of Vision Zero and safer streets came up. 

AUSTERMUHLET Do you think the city is moving aggressively enough to protect non-motorized users of the roadways?

ALLEN: Easy answer on that is no. We are not doing enough. We're not doing it fast enough, and we're not treating it with the urgency that it requires. We had 36 people that were killed last year on our roadways. We've had eight thus far this year. You know, I also do expand that out, about why you bring urgency. We've had over 50 people killed in homicides this year. We've had dozens of people die from opioid overdoses this year. Every one of those lives is tragic. Every one of those needs to be valued. And we need to, as a city, have a response with the urgency that is requires. So, this is why I have -- on all those other fronts, I continue to push, and on this one, I'm going to continue to push, as well. We're not doing enough, period.

SHERWOOD: Well, in the case of David Salovesh, he was killed, he was on Florida Avenue Northeast, near 12th and Florida. A stolen van crashed into...

ALLEN: That'll be a driver of a van. The van didn't drive itself.

SHERWOOD: A driver of a van, a 25-year-old driver of the van crushed him up against a tree. But I went back and looked at this, and just a block away from there -- and I was there at the Ghost Bikes ceremony over the weekend. There's lots of calls, like today. But I went back and looked at the record, and you've said your legislation is to push faster to get Florida Avenue -- which can be a six-lane speedway, in some places -- get more work done there. But I went back to Ruby Whitfield, who, roughly six years ago a block away was leaving her church, and she gets struck and killed, and nothing was done. The church members there had all the same kind of outrage and outpouring that we're having now. And I'm just wondering, I think -- were you probably chairman -- you were chief of staff to Tommy Wells in 2013?

ALLEN: At the time, yeah, when Ms. Whitfield was killed, she was crossing in the crosswalk, coming home from church. And the city did move and put up essentially what's called a hawk signal, so put up a lighted crosswalk....but it doesn't do anything about the design of the street. That, to me, is the fundamental (word?). Yes, a driver of a van is culpable for taking his vehicle up to over 60 miles an hour. But we also have a road that allows you to get to over 60 miles an hour. We've known that street is dangerous, and we haven't done anything about it. We've been spending ten years talking about a redesign of Florida Avenue, and we haven't done it yet. That's why I've pushed legislation to push for it.

There is more to the conversation that I've edited out (like an argument about whether or not the Hawk signal is still there. It is.), so go to the site if you want all of it. Later some one calls into to complain about Nazi bicyclists who take the lane just to clog up roads (the correct term is the Bike Reich, geez). 

ALLEN ...our roads have to be for everyone. We are so focused and we have built out so much around how you move around by car. There's going to be cars in the roadway, but our roadway is built for everyone, whether you are a pedestrian, whether you are on a bicycle, whether you are on a bus, whether you're on a scooter. Our roads have to be safe for every single user. And the way in which we have prioritized the convenience of the car over safety is, to me, the root of the problem. And, you know, a lot of these issues, I think, really sprung up -- when we talk about our region -- go back to 1950s and '60s, when we started building our freeways everywhere. We destroyed communities. But there's a reason why cars funnel in and pour through some neighborhoods, and others not. It is because we have built out our city in a way that is much more accommodating to the commuter than it is to the folks who live here. And when we talk about transit equity, look at the deaths last year on our roadways. A third of them are in Ward 8. So, this is an issue that cuts across the entire city.

Then Sherwood asked him about enforcement and how the police just let DDOT do that during rush hour. 

ALLEN...in less than two weeks, I'm going to be introducing some very big, bold Vision Zero legislation. And we'll speak to how our roadways must be redesigned for all users. It will also speak to how we can improve enforcement. At the end of the day....every decision has to be around: how do we provide a safer space for all users of our roadway?

Fairfax County cyclist struck by police officer in crosswalk, ticketed like a motor vehicle

Last week a cyclist crossed an intersection against the light, was struck by a police officer and then ticketed. The incident was caught on camera and so got wide reporting. Among other things, it's an example of why vision zero is necessary and difficult. While the cyclist was the only one penalized, he wasn't the only person at fault.

The first mistakes were made in the design of the intersection. The cyclist was riding on a shared-use path on the west side of Route 1. The only way for a path user to cross is to activate the beg button, which then doesn't give much time to cross. And the design of the intersection, with it's rounded corners encourages drivers to speed through the turn. Though not relevant to this incident, once across the intersection, the path has an unnecessary gap just past the curb ramp. So this intersection was designed to move cars quickly and vulnerable users were meant to navigate it with as little impact on drivers (and a rose bush) as they could design. It was a crash waiting to happen.

Next up is the driver. I don't think it's unreasonable to expect a police officer to drive safer than the general population. It's not connected to reality, but I think we should expect it. And this police officer didn't. In both videos, the driver starts out well across the Advanced Stop Line. Is that where he stopped when he approached the light? Because if so, he broke the law by stopping too far forward. My sense is that it was, but I'd love more footage to confirm that. I'd also like audio from the dashboard cam, so we could know what the driver was doing at the time. Was he talking on the phone? Did he have his turn signal on? Finally we get the turn itself. Under Virginia law

A. The driver of any vehicle on a highway shall yield the right-of-way to any pedestrian crossing such highway: 

1. At any clearly marked crosswalk, whether at mid-block or at the end of any block; 

In this case, the cyclist was legally a pedestrian and the driver should have yielded to him.  A driver should not move forward without looking forward. People do it all the time, but they shouldn't. 

The cyclist broke the law, and made a mistake, by crossing against the light. Also, while riding against traffic isn't against the law on the side path, it does require more caution than this cyclist demonstrated as it is more dangerous. 

The ticketing officer, reportedly a supervisor to the officer in the crash, then made two bad decisions. First they chose to ticket the cyclist. The cyclist got hit by a car and went to the hospital. One would think that he's already been punished. Maybe a written warning would suffice? But no, he got a ticket. And then the ticket they gave him was for failure to "pay full time and attention". But here's what the county code says about that:

No person shall operate a motor vehicle upon the highways of this County without giving his full time and attention to the operation of the vehicle

But a bicycle is not a motor vehicle, nor was it being operated on the roadway, since he came off the path. I don't want to nitpick, but this was an odd ticket to write when they could have ticketed him for ignoring the traffic control device.  If the police officer had been on the bike, I wonder if the ticketing would have been the same.

Next, the police chief made a whole list of mistakes in his statement.

Fairfax Police Chief Edwin C. Roessler Jr. said “The officer is waiting and checking to make sure the crosswalk is cleared. All of a sudden, the bicyclist makes no attempt to stop and goes right into the crosswalk . . . He’s going the wrong way. He’s going against traffic. He’s going against the red pedestrian signal. Once that bicycle enters the roadway, they’re subject to all the vehicular laws.”

Almost all of that is wrong. If the officer was checking to make sure the crosswalk is cleared, then he did a pretty terrible job of it. The cyclist didn't "suddenly" enter the crosswalk, but approached it at the same speed he crossed it - it's just the driver didn't notice because his full attention was on traffic to his left because he wanted to make a right turn on red.  The cyclist was not going the "wrong way" as a shared-use path is bidirectional. And a bicycle is not subject to vehicular laws when it enters a crosswalk. Again, from Virginia law (emphasis mine)

A person riding a bicycle... on a sidewalk or shared-use path or across a roadway on a crosswalk shall have all the rights and duties of a pedestrian under the same circumstances.

As GGW notes, this is a reason to make Richmond Highway safer, for which a plan exists, and to eliminate right-turn on red. 

The Vision Zero Enhancement Act of 2018 (and 2019)

Charles Allen announced plans to submit an updated and expanded version of his Vision Zero bill from last year. That bill was introduced in November of last year, after the Vision Zero hearing in September, which itself followed a year in which traffic fatalities continued to rise. Prior to that, DC had been promoting the unbelievably optimistic chart above (from a Feb 2018 MWCOG slide show). By the way, in that same presentation, they knew things weren't going like the chart above, because they included the chart below. One would think they would have sounded the alarm bells then, not wait for bike advocates to do so 4 months later. 

Anyway, back to Allen's bill. That bill had several good ideas in it, but it didn't even get hearing. The bill would do the following:

• Reduce the citywide speed limit to 20mph in residential areas - those zoned in Subtitles D-F and K in Title 11 of the DCMR

• Prohibit Right Turn On Red within a half mile of schools, in all of downtown and at intersection with a bike lane

• Authorize towing and impounding of vehicle blocking the bike lane

• Establish a Citizen Bike Safety Enforcement Pilot Program. The program would select and train 10 citizens and then authorize them to take photo of bike lane violators with an app. Those photos will then be treated as a notice of infraction. 1 year after the pilot ends, a report on the pilot would be sent to council 

Those are all good ideas. What would an expanded bill include? I don't know, but I got ideas.

• Get rid of the 10mph buffer on photo enforced tickets. 
• Add points to photo enforced tickets
• Make talking on the phone while driving illegal, hand-free or otherwise
• Create more ways to enforce violations, like cameras on buses - and also have fines increase for repeat offenders
• Require DDOT to remove on-street parking by setting a statutory limit (this will make it hard for them to give in to pressure to keep it)
• Increase the fee for a Residential Parking Permit
• Increase registration fees for heavy cars, cars with a high top speed and/or the most deadly make of cars
• Raise the gas tax
• Create a congestion zone
• Allow MPD to impound cars with rear license plate covers (they're already illegal and are meant to thwart cameras)
• Raise the tax on alcohol and use revenue to pay for an OWL bus service. 
• Close streets in bar districts near metro on weekend nights
• Create a requirement to retest drivers

While we're at it, there are a lot of things DDOT is already supposed to do, but has not. The "Bicycle and Pedestrian Safety Amendment Act of 2016" required the Mayor to send to the council a report and recommendations as to whether the District should implement a remediation and deferred disposition program for individuals that commit moving or nonmoving infractions in the District.

The report shall include the following:

(1) A review of the best practices in other jurisdictions;

(2) An examination of issues such as staffing levels and implementation costs;

(3) The moving and nonmoving infractions, if any, to which the remediation and deferred disposition program should apply;

(4) Whether the remediation and deferred disposition program should reduce the entire fine or number of points assessed, or a portion of the fine or number of points assessed; and

(5) If the Mayor recommends implementing a remediation and deferred disposition program, the report shall include a detailed description of the content of any proposed safety course provided in the program, the process by which a person would participate in the program, and the alternatives available to participants in lieu of paying a fine or being assessed points.

That was due on July 1, 2017. Let's just skip the report and have them design a system for deferred disposition. I don't really want to fine people for driving bad if instead I can teach them to drive better. 

Here's some other reports the Mayor was supposed to produce but hadn't as of last summer:

A) Annual reports on locations with the highest frequency of collisions that injure or kill pedestrians

B) Annual reports on the Bicycle and Pedestrian Priority Area Program

C) Annual reports on the Complete Streets policy progress

D) A report on whether DC Circulator buses and District-owned, heavy-duty vehicles should be equipped with pedestrian-alert technologies. 

E) A report on whether emergency vehicles should be equipped with cameras

F) A biannual report for improving bicycle and pedestrian safety (this only came due on July 1, 2018)

 

Also all trucks registered in DC are all supposed to have side underrun protection by now. Do they? Maybe the Mayor should report on that too. A requirement to report on that could go in the law.

 

It's ridiculous that pedestrians and cyclists should be so over-represented in the share of fatalities as this graph shows. 

Meanwhile, Mary Cheh has introduced the Mandatory Protected Cycling Lane Amendment Act of 2019. That bill would basically require DDOT to build any bike facility that is in the MoveDC plan on a road that they are doing "any road reconstruction, major repair, or curb and gutter replacement on." Those lanes should match up with other ones on the same road. But, they must still consult the ANC, the DDOT director can still decide not to build them if they're too expensive, it wouldn't be used by cyclists, the road can be made safe for cycling without the facility or the District would need to buy an easement to make it work. That's a lot of loopholes. 

 

One last bit of legislation to mention, Charles Allen introduced another bill on Tuesday, the Florida Avenue Multimodal Project Completion Emergency Amendment Act Of 2019.

this one aimed at enacting plans to redesign Florida Avenue in Northeast.

“I’ve asked, pleaded, criticized, and urged DDOT to take action and make needed decisions. That hasn’t always worked. For every year I’ve been on the Council, I’ve asked DDOT to move forward with the redesign of Florida Avenue NE. And each year, action is promised and then not delivered,” Allen wrote on Facebook. The legislation would set a timeline for the project and a series of penalties if the agency fails to meet the deadlines.

Initial thoughts following the Dave Salovesh murder

On Friday Dave Salovesh was killed by a driver in a stolen van who was speeding away from a police stop, ran a red light, hit a car and ricocheted into Dave. This was at Florida and 12th, NE. The driver was charged with 2nd Degree Murder. 

Dave

Dave and I only met a couple of times, but we disagreed on Twitter often. Dave saw incrementalism as accepting defeat and I saw it as being reasonable, and this was the source of our conflict. The last time I saw him he approached me to bury the hatchet as it were. I was still smarting from our last exchange but I came around and we shook hands and agree not to argue anymore and that we were on the same side. He was the better of us because I would have just left things in a bad place and I'm glad we didn't. 

I still believe that we should take the wins we can and move the ball forward, but Dave wasn't wrong. I remember reading in college about an white abolitionist who, in 1850, had a compromise plan to phase out slavery over the next 100 years. I'm sure he thought he was being reasonable, but the idea that we'd have still had slaves in America in 1949 is just insane. In 1850, the right time to end slavery was 1850. Dave is right that anything less than facilities that meet our goals of safe, green streets - especially in the name of congestion relief an on-street parking is morally wrong. The right time to build safe streets is 2019.  

Florida Avenue

It is not lost on anyone that the street on which Dave died has been part of a study process since 2009, and one that has missed numerous deadlines. One that made choices based on congestion, parking and automobile throughput to the detriment of safety. Dave was hit by a large vehicle, going at high speed and one could argue that even with a protected bike lane the outcome would have been the same. But even if you think that a protected bike lane would not have saved him, that's no less reason to be angry about the way the Florida Avenue redesign - and Vision Zero - have been carried out. 

The 2009 NoMa Neighborhood Access Study & Transportation Management Plan didn't include bike lanes on Florida, but it did recommend implementing a road diet and sidewalk widening over the next two years. That would have been early 2012. That work has not been done. 

In June 2013, following the death of a pedestrian in a crosswalk on Florida, they started the Florida Avenue Multimodal Transportation Study. That study came up with three alternatives, of which Alternative 3 included regular bike lanes on Florida Avenue east of West Virginia - the section where Dave was killed. But that option was dropped due to concerns about automobile throughput. For the same reasons, the sidewalks in this section are not to be widened either. This is actually in keeping with the purpose.

The purpose of the Florida Avenue Multimodal Transportation Study is to improve safety for all roadway users, particularly the most vulnerable (pedestrians and bicyclists), while ensuring safe access and improved mobility
for all modes within and through the study area.

Notice that language - improved mobility for all modes must be ensured, but improving safety is not. It also prevents certain trade-offs. Anything that would improve safety while hampering the mobility of drivers is out-of-scope. There's a whole section entitled "importance of motor vehicle access and mobility".

Look at this chart on the alternatives analysis. 

There's a whole section on auto safety; which is not to imply that isn't important too, just that it's called out and no one else's is. Nor is there simply one "safety" metric. Alt 3 is objectively better for pedestrians, cyclists, and transit users but has "local street impacts" when compared to the selected alternatives (a combination of 1 and 2 that doesn't even take full advantage of the improved auto safety alternatives). But the 5 level ranking doesn't give us enough of an idea of how much better or worse things are. A metric I'd like to see is "number of expected deaths". Let's just lay the choices out there. 

Part of the importance of auto efficiency is due to federal requirements. Florida Avenue is part of the highway system and must meet federal requirements and comply with applicable Federal regulations on performance (as defined by the FHWA). And part is likely explained by the fact that this predates Vision Zero. And the other part - because the purpose of the project wasn't defined with safety as a premium. 

Similarly, the study recommended bike lanes on West Virginia - if it didn't impact parking too much. Those have been on the books since at least 2005, but they still aren't there. 

If congestion in that section is really the problem as the study states it seems like that could be solved by removing the parking/peak traffic lanes and replacing them with bus/bike lanes (enforced with traffic cameras and barriers. Moving the 12 bus routes through the corridor faster would encourage fewer people to drive. You know what else would help? A downtown congestion charge. Because the benefits of congestion charging extend beyond zone where the charges occur. That would be the vision zero design. 

But even if we live with the recommended alternative from 2014, we're still left being angry at the pace. The multimodal study was to finish in May of 2014 but didn't until February of 2015. In 2017, they were to be done with the 100% design in Spring of 2018. They were still at the 30% design this past January with the 65% and 100% designs still to go.

They aren't working towards streets that maximize safety and then they aren't hitting their own deadlines to build the safety-compromised alternatives they've selected. No wonder the roads aren't getting safer.  

Vision Zero

And of course this is all emblematic of the larger problems of Vision Zero, which Dave often pointed out.

At least the Florida Ave study didn't pretend to be anything other than it was - an attempt to improve safety without making driving any worse. Vision Zero, on the other hand, is an attempt to create a city where people don't die or get seriously injured due to simple mistakes. But we are not taking the bold steps needed to reach such an audacious goal on the timeline we set. Or any other timeline either. It's as though the purpose of the Florida Ave study is the real idea - make roads safer, but let's not make driving any worse. And it's not limited to DDOT. Not only are we not tearing out miles of curbside parking and auto lanes to put in transit lanes, bike lanes and wider sidewalks, we aren't doing things we know will work - like a congestion charge. We still don't enforce traffic laws that are regularly broken in a way that make the roads safer. We could use cameras to enforce crosswalk violations and bike lane incursions for example. 

I've talked to many legislators who know that driving while talking on the phone is dangerous, hands-free or not, but like guests in the Exterminating Angel they seem to feel unable to make that illegal. "People would never put up with it" one told me. But they'll put up with deaths of their loved ones, I suppose?

It doesn't have to be this way. New York City is moving with real purpose - and that's with their own admission that they don't have full control of their own laws. They have to get the state to change laws for them. 

Maybe the problem is with the Mayor and DDOT. If so Council can follow the example of Cambridge, MA and force them to build safer streets. 

Cambridge, Massachusetts, passed a law on Monday directing the city to build new protected bike lanes whenever it does road work on certain streets. Known as the Cycling Safety Ordinance, it applies to all streets mapped out in the Cambridge Bicycle Plan, which recommends 20 miles of protected bike lanes throughout the 7-square-mile city, and effectively puts the weight of the law behind cycling infrastructure.

DDOT sometimes seems reluctant to follow through with their own ideas because of community opposition. This could give them the cover they need by saying "look, it's not up to us. We're just following the law." That might require council members to take the heat and risk losing their seats. But that seems like a better option than allowing people like Dave to lose their lives. 

Also, I updated this. 

 

Montgomery County Planning Board reports on trails

Last week, the Montgomery County Planning Board presented it's semi-annual report to the County Council and it included quite a bit about trail expansion and safety.

In total the county has about 245 miles of trail, much of which is unpaved or natural ground, according to the report.

“Trail usage data and surveys continue to tell us that our trails are among our most highly utilized and desired facilities,” said Michael Riley, who serves as Montgomery County Parks Director. “They serve so many different purposes from community building to physical fitness.”

Riley reported that a major project currently in the works is the Upper Paint Branch Trail plan which will create a sustainable multi-use trail network in an area that has fewer trails available.

“There was a low level of service in East County,” Riley said. “The trail will provide links to parks community destinations and a larger countywide trail network.”

It will also provide access to natural areas for people to enjoy. The project is in the implementation phase, Riley said.

The Upper Paint Branch trail system will be a natural surface trail system in eastern Montgomery County, near Burtonsville, Fairland, Cloverly, and White Oak.  There are four phases and work on phase 1 started in February. Phase 1 consists of a pair of natural surface loop trails near the source of the Good Hope Branch, a tributary of Upper Paint Branch. Phase 2 builds most of the trail north south along Upper Paint Branch, connecting to the Anacostia Tributary Trail System at Fairland Road, and should be built in the 2-5 year range. Phase 3, to be built more than 5 years from now will create some small pieces as well as extend it north to the Patuxent and west to New Hampshire Avenue. Phase 4 will be built sometime later and will consist of an underpass beneath Briggs Chaney Road.

The report also notes that the next section of the Power Line trail is scheduled to be completed by January 2020. It "will double the distance of the trail to connect Quince Orchard Road to Cabin John Regional Park." And that

To expand potential commuting opportunities for residents, Montgomery Parks will launch a year-long pilot program in spring 2019 to allow e-bikes and e-scooters on all hard surface park trails within the county. Throughout the pilot, Montgomery Parks will solicit public input to consider the possibility of making it a permanent program, which will also accommodate the growth in commercial dockless e-bikes and e-scooters in the county and DC region

The planning board is also focused on improving the safety of at-grade trail crossings

“We’ve identified 121 locations where park trails cross roads. We’re able with our current funding to improve about ten intersections per year,” Riley said.

The goal is to improve all of them by 2030. 

According to Riley, the trails have their own Vision Zero project that aims to eliminate deaths and injuries that are preventable by the design and laws of the roadway. Often that means redesigning streets so that pedestrians are more visible or lowering the speed limit for cars.

“I still meet regularly with state highway (officials), DOT and county police about the Henson crossing at a very small road where unfortunately we had experienced fatalities,” Riley said. “It is much improved but there is still more to be done, and I’m not going to quit on that until I believe that we’ve done absolutely everything we can do to make that intersection as safe as possible.”

There was also another fatality on the Little Falls Parkway where the Capital Crescent Trail crosses a major roadway.

In the first quarter of 2019, four projects have been completed and eight additional projects are under construction. Additionally, 15 crossings are scheduled for the design phase this spring.

Vision Zero and Trucks

Since Vision Zero was first implemented in the area there has only been one cyclist fatality involving a truck, but there have certainly been more collision, injuries and other road user deaths. NYC is taking steps to reduce the risks that large trucks bring with them, and they're having success and saving money, because crashing into people is deadly and into things is expensive.

Since New York City announced its Vision Zero initiative in 2014, collisions per mile have dropped across the city’s fleet, the fleet has seen a reduction in red light and speeding violations and traffic fatalities have declined by 26 percent, while they have increased by 13 percent nationally.

“One of the things we know from our crash tracking is that 50 percent of the collisions that we are involved with that lead to litigations and claims are rear-end events due to tailgating and speeding. It’s a $50 million program for the city, and it’s a very simple thing to avoid. We do focus on training, and we think that’s where everyone should start.”

In addition to training, they're only buying high visibility vehicles when they're available. These trucks minimize blind spots by lowering the height of the truck cab, using additional windows and reducing the size and height of the truck’s hood.

This includes vehicles like tow trucks, garbage trucks and dump trucks, among other types. Overall, New York City operates at least 2,500 conventionally designed work trucks that could be transitioned to high vision trucks through this initiative.

As part of the initiative, the city adopted a Vision Zero Safe Fleet Transition Plan (SFTP), which was first published in May 2017 and outlines a series of safety investments that DCAS will require of fleet vehicles. In less than two years, the SFTP has resulted in the implementation of nearly 20,000 safety upgrades, including expanded use of automatic braking, backup cameras, driver alert systems, blind spot alerts, heated mirrors, truck side guards and vehicle telematics. 

The SFTP notes that 

In 2015, the expansion of Automatic emergency braking (AEB) to avoid or mitigate collisions involving pedestrians/bicyclists topped the list of measures considered likely to be cost-beneficial for possible future legislation by the EU in a Transport Research Laboratory report

The Volvo Trucks Safety Report 2017 finds that pedestrian-capable AEB or Forward Collision Warning (FCW) could be relevant for preventing or mitigating about 40 percent of crashes between large trucks and bicyclists or pedestrians in Europe.

In addition, NACTO recommends buying smaller vehicles where possible. 

“In our research, we found that it’s possible to have the best of both worlds: smaller, more maneuverable trucks, with the same capabilities as larger, less nimble models,” said Jonah Chiarenza of the U.S. Department of Transportation Volpe Center in a release. “As cities look at new models in the life cycle of replacing their fleets, this win-win dynamic can help make for safer streets.”

Like smaller Vision Zero fire trucks.

Meanwhile, UPS is experimenting with using electric-assist tricycles in Seattle. 

In the new system, cyclists will pull a trailer from UPS’ distribution center to a vehicle parking spot downtown. They’ll drop off the trailer, then ride on sidewalks and in designated bike lanes to make deliveries in narrow and congested areas, like Pike Place Market.

UPS partnered with the Seattle Department of Transportation to develop the pilot project. Riders will be trained to follow city ordinances.

These are things we should be trying in DC. There are ways to incentivize UPS to not drive in the CBD during rush hour, for example.

UPS started out as a bicycle delivery company in Seattle. It'd be great if they found their way back to that - at least in part. 

MoCo Deputy Director says Complete Streets are too expensive and too hard on drivers

Planners in Montgomery County want to make Veirs Mill into a Complete Street, with BRT, sidewalks, a grade-separated crossing of the Matthew Henson Trail and a bikeway; but Montgomery County Council Deputy Director Glenn Orlin, in a memo to the Planning, Housing, and Economic Development Committee says that will all be too expensive and will make driving worse. 

Orlin states that Complete Streets are an "urban" thing, but that Veirs Mill is a suburban major highway. 

Like most major highways, Veirs Mill Road has a heavy volume of traffic because-unlike in city environments where there is a fine-grained street grid-in the suburbs there are far fewer route choices by which to convey people and goods, and much longer distances that need to be traversed.

The Draft Plan has the goal of recreating Veirs Mill Road as a "complete street." This concept which would treat the safety and mobility needs of pedestrians, bicyclists, and motor vehicles more or less equally-is normally reserved for urban environments where all are moving closer to the same pace.

However, Veirs Mill Road, from where it leaves the Wheaton CBD to where it enters the Rockville CBD, traverses what is clearly a suburban environment, and the Draft Plan's land use recommendations would not change that. Except for the Veirs Mill commercial area, there is no concentration of pedestrian-oriented uses that would warrant urban-type street treatments.

And so any changes to make it more pedestrian or transit oriented, if they harm drivers, are a real problem. 

The Draft Plan calls for an expensive package of improvements, and each improvement would enhance transit, bicycle, or pedestrian mobility. On the other hand, all the road changes newly proposed by the plan would render more difficult the mobility of people in motor vehicles: taking away through lanes, eliminating channelized turn lanes, and eliminating double left-tum lanes, among others. 

As to the costs

Executive staff estimates the County cost of new capital improvements associated with the Draft Plan to be $175.3 million, all of which would be transportation improvements.

The largest items are for their assumed County's costs to construct Veirs Mill Road Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Alternative 2.52 ($39.6 million) and, ultimately, to include continuous BRT lanes (Alternative 3, another $34.4 million); and grade separating Veirs Mill Road over the Matthew Henson Trail ($44.4 million). The $56.9 million balance is almost entirely for a host of other bicycle and pedestrian improvements. The FIS notes that if the Matthew Henson Trail were bridged over Veirs Mill Road instead of vice versa, the grade separation cost would be $11.2 million, bringing the overall County cost down to $142.1 million.

One of the big criticisms is that vehicle delays will become inadequate (more than 2 minutes per vehicle in some cases) as defined by the county. Planners are suggesting that maybe the county should accept longer delays in order to get safer streets. County Staff recommends against because....allowing more congestion will lead to more congestion. 

Elsewhere, the Draft Plan recommends removing a master planned diamond interchange at Randolph Road because "A grade-separated interchange at this intersection is inconsistent with the overall transportation goals of this plan, which seek to improve conditions for pedestrians, bicyclists and transit users on Veirs Mill Road and the surrounding communities", but County Staff recommends against that because the interchange will reduce congestion. They recommend the design below because it will break up the crossing distance for pedestrians and cyclists and more efficiently use land. 

The Draft Plan recommends removing double-left turn lanes because of safety concerns. County Staff recommends against that because - you guessed it - it would cause congestion.

County Staff also recommend faster design speeds, more channelized right turn lanes and wider lanes, all contrary to the Draft Plan recommendations.

They also state that "where there is a frontage street that it serve as the bikeway on that side of Veirs Mill Road, at least in the short term" instead of a protected bike lane. 

One good recommendation involves short-term planning for the Henson Trail crossing. Planning Staff recommended an improved at-grade crossing, but Council Staff recommends an overpass. 

Frankly, the County should have budgeted the cost of a trail bridge when the trail was initially built.

I have to agree there. 

It does look like these changes will be expensive. But if we start arguing that traffic sewers are popular and important ways to deal with congestion and that therefore we can't change them, then we're just deciding to have traffic sewers forever. No one said Vision Zero was going to be cheap. 

New DC Bike lane and Vision Zero regulations

DDOT has been busy adding and modifying their regulations in an effort to make roads safer. A set of Vision Zero regulations went into effect at the start of the year and new rules governing the Proper Behavior in Bike Lanes were published this week - to go into effect in 30 days. 

The Vision Zero regulations will

• raise the fines for
  • excessive speed
  • failure to stop at a stop sign
  • failure to yield to a pedestrian
  • making an illegal right-turn-on-red
  • overtaking another vehicle stopped for a pedestrian
  • stopping, standing or parking in a bike lane
  • parking in medians or safety zones
  • Dooring
  • Driving on the sidewalk
  • Carrying an item on a bicycle that prevents the usage of at least one hand
  • Hitching onto a moving vehicle (on a bicycle)
  • Failure to yield (on a bicycle)
  • Bicycling too fast
  • Walking suddenly into the path of a vehicle, without the right-of-way, and colliding with it
• Creates new fines
  • for crashing into a pedestrian on the sidewalk or when the pedestrian has the right-of-way while riding a bicycle
  • Riding with a headset,  headphones, or earplugs covering both ears
• add points for failing to move out of the way of an ambulance, overtaking another vehicle stopped for a pedestrian or to proceed with caution near an incident
• require side guards on large commercial vehicles within 2 years
• lower the speed limit near schools and rec centers to 15mph for much of the day
• require drivers to yield to buses that have signaled to move back into traffic
• ban stopping or parking in a travel lane
• Expands dooring fines to include both sides of the vehicle

Mostly the Vision Zero rules are good. 

In most cases raising the fine probably won't do much, but for illegal parking (in the bike lane or otherwise) it might help with commercial vehicles. To the extent that you believe UPS/Fedex and the like have decided that parking tickets are just a cost like gasoline, raising the cost could help them to re-evaluate their business plan. For the raised fines for cycling infractions, I'm old enough to remember when all the fines were dropped to $25 as the city tried to get more bike friendly, but (my theory) an appearance of equity matters. 

The new rule about not riding with headphones in each year is hard to justify. There's not a lot of scientific justification for it, and there really can't be because there hasn't been much study of the subject. A 2009 study found that people who listen to music break more traffic laws (but that's likely not causal) and perceive that they are more at risk (slightly more than riding with one hand). Observations showed that 4-8% of cyclists are observed listening to music but only 2.2% of cyclists report listening when they're in a crash. There is no distinction in this study between listening with both ears or one ear. In the figure below, of perceived risk,Control 1 is riding with 1 hand and Control 2 is riding with both hands. MP3 is listening to music.

In total that data is hardly damning. Further, are they saying the hearing impaired can't bike safely? I think there would be some pushback on such a claim.

There's another study (I can't find now) that shows that cyclists auditory perception does go down when listening to headphones in both ears - as anyone would expect - but that even then, it is better than that of drivers listening to the radio. So, it might save lives, but if it's a good idea then we're missing out by not removing radios from all cars.  Frankly, I don't know of any crashes where dual-headphone use by a cyclist was a contributing factor - but MPD should add this as a statistic to track to see if there is some relationship. 

The side underrun guards were something proposed by the safety commission Cheh set up several years ago, so I'm not sure why it took so long to get the regulations in place. In the intervening time there's been at least one crash where such guards could have saved the cyclist's life.

Naturally, John Townsend of AAA protested the fines. 

“This is about generating revenue under the patina of traffic safety,” said John B. Townsend II, a spokesman for AAA Mid-Atlantic. “There is not a shred of empirical evidence or research that proves that higher traffic fines deter bad driving behavior, and the District knows this and ignores the fact.”

I tend to agree that there's no evidence tying higher fines to better behavior, but I disagree about revenue being the motivation. I think they are just trying to turn the knobs they have. 

The recently published proposed bike lane rules limit when a driver may use a bike lane to legal turns, parallel parking and at the direction of a police officer. This is a subtle difference as, right now, they may also block a bike lane "when necessary to avoid conflict with other traffic". So drivers won't be able to do that anymore. It also removes the loophole that allows for double parking or other "bad" parking temporarily to load or unload freight or passengers. I'm not sure what prompted the first change, but I would guess someone started abusing that loophole. The second changes is long overdue.

Speeding is a primary cause of traffic deaths in DC

The Governors Highway Safety Association put out a report on Speeding and traffic safety entitled "Rethinking a Forgotten Traffic Safety Challenge". It's unclear who forgot that speeding was a traffic safety issue or how they remembered but the report does highlight one important fact that I think we all knew - speeding is one of the major causes of traffic death in DC.  Speed-related crashes made up 55 percent of all motor-vehicle deaths in 2017. In Maryland and Virginia it was 29 and 26 percent respectively.

The media made much of the comparison aspect that labelled DC "2nd" in the nation for speed related deaths, but the comparison is largely meaningless. If DC got down to just one traffic death, but it was speed-related, we'd catapult to #1 on the list with 100%. Likewise we could increase all non-speed related crashes and move down the list while getting more dangerous. The states with the lowest rates of speeding deaths are Mississippi and Florida, both of which are among the least safe on a deaths/VMT measure. Whereas DC is 6th safest (As always, comparing DC to states has flaws). 

The report also notes that the states don't have a uniform method for reporting crash causes "In GHSA’s survey of the states, respondents reported several inconsistencies across the country regarding ability to report speeding as a causative factor in a fatal crash." DC may report more speed-related crashes because we have so many more cameras per mile of road that our investigators can watch most crashes happen or about to happen and know that the driver was speeding. (And DC gets a lot safer on a Person-Mile-Travelled basis because so many people take transit, walk or bike). There are many possible reasons for the different reported numbers and it shouldn't be taken that DC is somehow uniquely dangerous.

But....It is useful to know that speeding plays a part in a majority of fatalities. If we're trying to reduce traffic deaths as part of Vision Zero it helps to know what is causing them. One reason our speeding deaths are so high is likely that drunk driving is very high. 70% of drivers that die in DC are above the legal limit, and when people drink and drive, they're more likely to speed.  DC is an outlier as 70% is much higher than the rest of the country (North Dakota is 2nd at 49%), though again, there are reporting differences. 

It should be no surprise that getting people to drive sober and getting them to slow down will go a long way to achieving Vision Zero. So will getting them to not drive at all.

Here's the other thing that the report says relevant to biking

Speeding-Related Crashes Involving Vulnerable Road Users
Differential speeds in mixed traffic is a factor in the recent increase in pedestrian and bicycling crashes and fatalities (NCSA, 2018b). In fact, pedestrian fatalities are at highest levels recorded in more than two decades. Vehicle speeding seriously impacts pedestrian and bicyclist safety not only by increasing the chances of a crash, but also by increasing the risk of death when they are involved in a crash. A higher incidence of distraction and impairment, in addition to speeding and low lighting on roadways, were reported to be causation factors in crashes involving pedestrians and bicyclists specifically during evening or nighttime hours.

Excessive vehicle speeds also have serious implications for bicyclists. The League of American Bicyclists attempted to track and analyze every bicyclist fatality in the U.S. between 2011 and 2013, finding that 44% of fatalities occurred on high-speed urban arterial roads (McLeod and Murphy, 2014).

A recent study from Texas A&M University found, “While high design speeds are viewed as desirable for motorist safety, they are not safe for pedestrians and bicyclists” (Essex et. al, 2017). In 2017, there were 783 bicyclists killed in traffic crashes in the United States (NCSA, 2018b). States reported that the increase in bicyclists and pedestrians on our roads calls for increased efforts to ensure the safety of all road users, including reducing incidence of speeding. Reducing speeding-related bicyclist fatalities by identifying countermeasures and implementing infrastructural improvements such as traffic calming measures and road diets is essential to improving overall road safety.

So DC is still relatively safe compared to other areas, primarily because so many passenger miles are traveled in something other than a car, but to make roads safer we need people to not drive drunk and to slow down. All of my most important Vision Zero thoughts are in that sentence. 

One more thing:

A recent study ... showed that marijuana had no effect on the variability of speed. In fact, in the combined alcohol and marijuana condition, it appeared marijuana mitigated some of the effects found with alcohol by reducing the time spent above the speed limit. [Other studies in the field contradict that].

Alexandria installs New Leading Pedestrian Intervals as Part of Vision Zero Initiative

From a press release:

In order to increase traffic safety, City of Alexandria staff recently installed 17 new Leading Pedestrian Intervals in high crash intersections or corridors as part of the implementation of the City’s Vision Zero Initiative to eliminate traffic-related deaths and serious injuries by 2028. 

 

As part of the Vision Zero Action Plan, one of the Year 1 Engineering Priorities is to install Leading Pedestrian Intervals in at least 10 intersections to improve safety for people walking and driving. Staff identified more than 10 locations where these improvements were warranted and installed 17 new leading pedestrian intervals, along with their respective No Turn on Red restrictions.

 

A Leading Pedestrian Interval is signal timing change that starts the walk signal a few seconds before the green light to give people waiting to cross the street a head start in front of turning vehicles so that drivers can better see people walking and avoid a serious crash. Localities across the country and around the world (including Alexandria) have been implementing this solution for decades. Staff has implemented this in the following locations: 

• Route 1 and Gibbon
• Route 1 and Wilkes
• King and Washington  
• King and Henry
• King and Patrick
• Wilkes and Washington
• Duke and Henry (both crossings)
• Gibbon and Washington
• Slaters and Washington
• Cambridge and Duke (both crossings)
• N. Quaker and Duke
• Cameron Station and Duke
• Whiting and Edsall 
• Slaters and Route 1
• Duke and Holland 

City staff analyzed crash data, industry best practices and research, and public input, and 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 vulnerable road users (e.g. people walking and biking, children, and seniors) first. Crash data showed that during this time between 2011-2016, 445 people walking were involved in crashes, with one in seven crashes resulting in death or serious injury to the person. Turning-movement crashes were also found to be among the most common crash types in Alexandria. Leading Pedestrian Intervals aid in the prevention of turning movement crashes along with No Turn on Red Restrictions. 

Alexandria should follow DC's lead and allow cyclists to go through an intersection when the walk light is green. Maybe that's a state thing though.