Posts by Brian McEntee

The Ideal Cyclist yields. She yields to cars and pedestrians and buses and trains and baby ducklings. She yields to yield signs.

The Ideal Cyclist only rides in bike lanes. On streets where there are no bike lanes, the Ideal Cyclist does not ride for fear of offending. He walks his bike along the sidewalk. If someone else is on the sidewalk, the Ideal Cyclist will lift his bicycle above his head and pretend to be an inoffensive street tree. He heeds all passers-by.

The Ideal Cyclist will sometimes drive her bicycle to a street where there are bike lanes to begin her trip and ask a friend to pick her up where the lanes end. She shares the road by vacating it. When the Ideal Cyclist chances upon something or someone blocking the bike lane, the Ideal Cyclist will stop and wait for the object or person to clear.

The Ideal Cyclist is patient. He has been known to wait upwards of days for the removal of a traffic cone. When the Ideal Cyclist reaches a four-way stop near the same time as drivers, he stops, looks, waves the others through and hails a cab.

The Ideal Cyclist will nod patiently and agree with friends and acquaintances who tell stories about the horribleness of non-ideal cyclists. He accepts the sins of the bike world as his own. The Ideal Cyclist is the one with the bad name, to whom it was given by the actions of others. He has endless empathy for the scores of people "almost hit" and beseeches the forgiveness from those who were startled in their cars that time "that guy came out of nowhere."

The Ideal Cyclist always comes out of somewhere. She gives ample warning. She uses a bell, but does not ring it in a way that could be interpreted as scolding or even suggestive of imploring action. She rings gently and the ding is sonorous and soothing.

When the Ideal Cyclist calls out "on your left" he does it in the romance language of your choosing because the Ideal Cyclist appreciates your desire for mellifluousness. He then declines to pass because there isn't enough room. That could cause a gentle wisp of wind and it could muss one's hair or perhaps wrinkle a shirt or maybe just make one's skin feel the breeze and no one asked for that.

The Ideal Cyclist does not ask for more bike lanes. In fact, she wants fewer. She wants to only ride on trails—ideally, trails that go nowhere—because the Ideal Cyclist is a recreationalist. Though she rides for sport and pleasure, she does not ride in a group. Ever. She rides single-file, alone and hunches over her bike to form the smallest profile possible, like an animal hiding from a predator. If there are other users on the trail, the Ideal Cyclist goes home.

The Ideal Cyclist seeks penance in advance for the confusion he causes. Perhaps he volunteers his time to change the oil of poor drivers. He might pay other people's speeding tickets anonymously. The Ideal Cyclist knows that his appearance in the world is an unexpected shock. Seeing a cyclist on the road is a close encounter of the third kind. The Truth is Out There.

The Ideal Cyclist never asks for anything better. She opposes bike sharing. The Ideal Cyclist is an avid bicyclist who used to bike, but doesn't anymore. The Ideal Cyclist is too concerned about the safety of others to ever cycle near them. She cycles alone at home, preferably in the dark so the neighbors do not see her secret shame.

The Ideal Cyclist knows that he is a leech on society. He knows that he is using precious road space for his own selfish desires. He knows that he is getting away with not paying his fair share. The Ideal Cyclist registers his bike with the DMV. He encourages others to do the same. Even little kids.

The Ideal Cyclist recognizes that there's no such thing as false equivalency. Her rights and responsibilities are the same as everyone else's. Maybe even more the same. The Ideal Cyclist doesn't even know what hypocrisy is.

The Ideal Cyclist knows that cars are subjects and not objects. He never suspects criminality because accidents happen. They're unavoidable. It's not blaming the victim if it's a victim's fault and the victim should have known how dangerous it was before he did the thing that he did. After all, if the thing he did wasn't dangerous, how did he become the victim in the first place?

The Ideal Cyclist tries to blend in with normal society, but she cannot. The Ideal Cyclist sees things from others' perspectives, but never suggests that she has her own. The Ideal Cyclist does not wish to disturb the natural order of built things, nor does she question it.

The Ideal Cyclist's priority if the priority of others. The Ideal Cyclist never mentions that others might enjoy cycling. He will not speak to cycling's potential appeal. He is no evangelist.

The Ideal Cyclist doesn't even ride a bike.

Cross-posted at Tales From the Sharrows.

Spirited argument is important in public policy, but it should not cross into insults. When it does, that has a chilling effect on open discourse. Fostering an inclusive conversation about the shape of our region is the purpose of this site, but discourse must be civil to be truly open. That's why our comment policy here on Greater Greater Washington prohibits invective like this. In our articles, we try hard to avoid crossing this line, and are disappointed when we or others do, intentionally or inadvertently.

The "war on cars" frame unnecessarily pits drivers against cyclists and pedestrians instead of working together for positive solutions. The City Paper article, by Aaron Wiener, does a good job of debunking that, and is worth reading for much more than the insults it quotes.

When pressed, Townsend told Wiener he wants to back away from the "war on cars."

"I regret the rhetoric sometimes," he says. "Because I think that when you use that type of language, it shuts down communication with people who disagree."

We hope Townsend, his colleagues, and their superiors also regret the things he said about David and Greater Greater Washington. We look forward to the day when AAA ceases using antagonistic language and begins working toward safety, mobility, and harmony among all road users.

In the meantime, residents do have a choice when purchasing towing, insurance, and travel discounts. Better World Club is one company that offers many of the same benefits as AAA, but without the disdain.

Yards Park unnecessarily bans bicycles

Rules and regulations for the Yards Park are unequivocal. They list "bike riding," along with drug and alcohol use, smoking and "using more than one seat on a bench designed for sharing" among those activities prohibited by park guidelines.

The rules list no reason, but this most likely derives from a presumed conflict between cyclists and other users of the park, as is common on mixed-use paths. However, inside the park itself, that conflict doesn't arise.

The path through the park, including the bridges from Diamond Teague Park and the boardwalk that runs to the entrance of the Washington Navy Yard, is quite wide (upwards of 30 feet in parts) and has plenty of space for many different kinds of users to mix.

Rather than contribute to conflicts, this vast amount of space gives ample room for cyclists to pass safely while still letting people on foot casually stroll or enjoy the view. Though the path does narrow at certain points, it still remains wide enough for mixed bicycle and pedestrian traffic.

This award-winning park is quite a lovely one. It could become an activity center in the Near Southeast neighborhood, as the home of restaurants and shops that will be genuine amenities for the nearby community. Yards Park has also hosted many community events, including last year's celebration of bicycling, the Tour de Fat, hosted by New Belgium Brewery, which sought to "spread... the good word about the positive societal offerings of the bicycle." The event raised over $20,000 for the Washington Area Bicyclist Association.

Banning bicycles seems contradictory to the goal of becoming a welcoming gathering place for an increasingly multi-modal neighborhood.

Navy Yard Riverwalk unnecessarily bans bicycles

The Washington Navy Yard Riverwalk has, in the past few years, gone from completely prohibiting public access to limited public access on workdays, to expanded daytime access on weekdays, to daytime access seven days a week, to unlimited 24/7 public access, with the exception of closures for official events. Each successive increase in accessibility has been a step in the correct direction.

However, this increase is access does not extend to bicyclists. The Navy Yard Riverwalk rules prohibit bicycling, along with rollerblading and skateboarding. Child strollers and wheelchairs are still permitted. Much like the path through Yards Park, this section of the trail does not lack for space to accommodate of cyclists and pedestrians.

The Navy justifies the ban among the Frequently Asked Questions:

Q: Can I ride my bike or roller blade on the Riverwalk?

A: No. Bike riding, rollerblading, skateboarding, or scooter use is not permitted. The pedestrian bridge that makes up part of the Navy Yard's Riverwalk is narrow, and cannot support intermingled pedestrian and any type of vehicular traffic. Child strollers and wheelchairs are allowed.

Employees exiting through turnstiles onto the Riverwalk will not have immediate situational awareness of their surroundings, and may not see oncoming vehicular traffic in time to avoid a collision. The reverse would be true for someone who is on a bicycle, skateboard, rollerblades or scooter who would suddenly be confronted with a pedestrian that emerged from a turnstile. This is an obvious safety concern as collisions would be unavoidable.

The pedestrian bridge mentioned above is about 60 feet long and approximately 5 feet across. It seems sensible to think that this is too narrow to be effectively and safely shared by pedestrians and cyclists.

However, given that the bridge is only a very small section of the trail, it does not seem to justify banning bicycling throughout. The Navy could place a "Dismount Bikes When Pedestrians Present" sign here and permit bicycling in the other, wider sections that make up the overwhelming majority of the Navy Yard Riverwalk.

Perhaps more curious is the reference to the security-controlled turnstiles that sporadically provide access from the trail to the facilty and vice versa.

On the other side of the 3 of 4 turnstiles are parking lots. Presumably, the lack of situational awareness that accompanies the use of a turnstile proves to be no problem when heading the other direction, and while collisions with bicyclists, rollerbladers, skateboarders and scooter users are unavoidable, collisions with automobiles are not.

Unless a cyclist were riding within a few feet nearest to the turnstile and fence that separate the facility from the Riverwalk (and given the width of the trail, this seems unlikely), there is no good reason to believe that a collision would obviously occur.

There are far less burdensome ways to keep pedestrians safe

In both the case of the Navy Yard and Yards Park, the outright bans are clumsy approaches to the commendable goal of pedestrian safety. As the pictures above show, both facilities have more than enough room for users on foot and on bicycles to share them effectively. Each is even vastly wider than the region's shared mixed-use paths, like the Capital Crescent Trail and the Mount Vernon Trail.

To better help different users share the trail, there could be elements as simple as signs asking pedestrians and bicyclists to be mindful or each other, or painted sharrows, pointing out the preferred path for bicyclists through the area. Efforts to keep pedestrians safe need not come at the cost of removing Yards Park and the Navy Yard Riverwalk as destinations for people arriving by bicycle.

If Yards Park and the Navy Yard Riverwalk continue to ban bicycling, the alternative options for cyclists traveling along the Anacostia Riverwalk Trail from areas such as Hill East, Kingman Park, the Southwest Waterfront or East Potomac Park include crossing the Anacostia River on the 11th Street Bridge and then recrossing on the Douglass Bridge, bicycling along the 6-lane M Street SE/SW, or diverting to L Street SE, a quiet neighborhood street that is amenable to biking, but not in any way along the Anacostia Riverwalk Trail.

"The rules against biking in Yards Park and on the Navy Yard Riverwalk are frustrating for a few reasons—first and foremost being that no one would naturally assume that bikes aren't allowed in these attractive, convenient, and spacious waterfront areas," writes David Garber, neighborhood commissioner in ANC 6D.

"If we are 100% about encouraging biking in DC, especially in a neighborhood often touted by District officials as being multi-modal, our rules about biking have to match our talk." Garber plans to introduce resolutions encouraging a closer look at these rules at a future ANC meeting.

The Anacostia Riverwalk Trail provides a genuine alternative to bicycling along city streets. For families, beginner cyclists and those who wish to enjoy a quiet ride in a natural environment, this link will prove vital to Washington's transportation and recreation system. However, bicycle bans jeopardize these seamless, off-street connections.

Mayor Gray, DDOT and local stakeholders must work with Yards Park and the Washington Navy Yard to balance the needs of pedestrian safety with the the need for a continuous bicycling corridor in this part of the District. People on bicycles and on foot can coexist, and our trails and public spaces must demonstrate this fact.

Jaffe wrote:

As a cyclist, I am overjoyed. When the city creates a matching bike lane on M Street, perhaps in early 2013, I will be able to commute from home to work in dedicated bike lanes. But as a driver, I question whether it's fair to autos. I see it creating miles of traffic if cops allow double parking, and I fear accidents if cyclists and drivers don't respect one another. Bikers always lose.

He seems to be saying we shouldn't install any bike lanes because the city might not enforce the laws, or drivers might drive dangerously. Maybe bikers do always lose—if we can't try to make streets safer for them because other people might misbehave.

Brian attended a lunch briefing yesterday with Martha Roskowski of the Green Lane Project and officials from the District Department of Transportation (DDOT). Jim Sebastian and Mike Godono of DDOT said that bicycle use on 15th Street NW has increased 272% since they installed the cycle track there, and 200% on Pennsylvania Avenue.

Bike crashes have remained steady, in spite of the increased numbers of riders, and there have been no additional pedestrian or car crashes as a result of the protected lanes. According to DDOT's evaluation, the lanes' impact on car traffic on 15th Street and on Pennsylvania Avenue has been negligible.

The Green Lane Project supports cities building separated "cycle tracks," like the one on L. Unlike standard familiar bike lanes, separated cycle tracks place some kind of barrier between cyclists and other road users, such as plastic bollards, raised curbs, parked cars and more. The group believes that providing a protected space for bicyclists on the roadway will make streets safer and also entice the 60% of potential cyclists who are "interested but concerned."

Furthermore, by separating bicyclists from car traffic, these kinds of lanes will create a predictable place for drivers to expect to see cyclists. Separating bike traffic from car traffic will reduce conflicts between drivers and cyclists and allowing each kind of vehicle to travel at its appropriate speed. With more road users on bicycles, this should reduce congestion for drivers as well.

These reasons show why the bikes-vs-cars tradeoff Jaffe and Townsend set out is a false one. More people bicycling means that drivers have fewer other cars to compete with. Bikes take up far less space, even when they get a lane-wide cycletrack on a few roads. Bike lanes even get bikes out of drivers' way in many cases.

In a video report for NBC Washington that also plays up the conflict, Adam Tuss quotes a driver who complains about how he was driving down L Street "behind a bicyclist going 5 miles an hour dead in the middle of the lane, and traffic is backed up all behind him." Later, the same driver suggests ticketing bicyclists who don't use the bike lanes, and then, "I'm saying a lot of bicyclists don't follow the rules."

Actually, it's completely legal to drive in the middle of the lane, and in fact that's the recommended safest practice. Riding in a bike lane is also not required. Perhaps it's the driver who needs to learn the rules, but building this bike lane could move a lot of cyclists out of car lanes, just what this driver wants.

It's time to not just stop with the "war on cars" theme, but also its cousins, Townsend's "I'm not saying war on cars but ..." and "bikes are squeezing out cars" from Jaffe's headline.

WABA put out an action alert asking residents to email Mayor Gray, DDOT Director Terry Bellamy, and Sebastian to thank them for building the L Street bike lane. It can't hurt to also encourage them to quickly follow up with its planned twin on M Street. Please send them that message, and prevent the cars vs. bikes false choice from jeopardizing a very important project.