Bike Safety - Greater Greater Washington

And..

Mon, 20 May 2013 08:53:00 EDT

How does BART's strategic planning resemble Metro's? (PlanItMetro) ... Ken Cuccinelli says FOIA doesn't apply to his office. (Post) ... The biker killed on U Street Thursday is Andre Brands, 50. (Examiner)

Comment

Cyclist struck, critically injured

Fri, 17 May 2013 08:29:00 EDT

by Steven Yates

A 20-year-old cyclist ~~died~~ is in critical condition after a collision with a driver at 11th and U, NW Thursday morning. Police didn't specify which direction the cyclist or driver were traveling, but the driver did stay on the scene. Update: Some reports said the cyclist died, but that is still unconfirmed. (Post)

Comment

A driver ran a red light, hit me, and fled

Mon, 06 May 2013 10:14:00 EDT

by Ryan Sigworth

On Wednesday, a driver on Massachusetts Avenue hit me while making an illegal and dangerous turn onto 9th Street NW. I was bicycling east on Massachusetts Avenue, waiting to cross 9th Street on the south side crosswalk. The driver fled the scene.

The intersection. Photo by thisisbossi on Flickr.

I travel this area frequently, and know this is a dangerous intersection because it includes a right red arrow to allow pedestrians to cross 9th Street safely even while other through lanes get a green light. Many drivers nevertheless illegally turn right when the light turns green for people continuing straight.

I have asked the District Department of Transportation (DDOT) and Metropolitan Police Department (MPD) on multiple occasions to add enforcement here, but have never witnessed any.

I have seen this behavior numerous times before at this spot, so I am ready for it. However, this time the first car, a black Chevy Suburban waiting to turn right, remained stopped. But the driver second in line could not stand for this, changed lanes to the left, then drove around the Suburban to make the right turn.

I saw this coming from the corner of my field of vision, but it was too late. The driver cut in front of me, clipping my front tire with the rear corner of his car. It was a grazing blow, but enough to knock me off the bike.

The driver left the scene, never bothering to stop. Fortunately, my spill was fairly minor and I was able to continue to Union Station with little injury. However, if I had been a few seconds faster, I would have been more squarely in his path and would likely be in the hospital.

Without enforcement, lawlessness runs rampant

There was no police officer to witness the incident. Police can't be be everywhere and catch everything. However, I've also seen MPD simply ignore dangerous infractions by drivers, cyclists, and pedestrians occurring directly in front of them.

Last weekend, while riding in the 15th Street cycletrack, a driver illegally turned left against the protected left turn signal at 15th and U Street NW, right behind my wife and me. By coincidence, a MPD patrol unit was directly behind this illegally turning driver but did nothing.

On the same trip, my wife and I witnessed two illegal U-turns on Pennsylvania Avenue right in front of police cars and officers stationed along the street for the marathon. At the time, there were lots of pedestrians and cyclists around but they refused to enforce against illegal driving right in front of them.

This is even more frustrating because this episode occurred during the regional Street Smart campaign, an annual campaign to raise safety awareness and increase enforcement. Mayor Vincent Gray stood with MPD Chief Cathy Lanier to announce DC's part of the program a week ago, alongside advocacy groups such as WABA. The Pennsylvania Avenue cycle track was supposed to be an area targeted for enforcement during this campaign.

Drivers are not the only problem. Cyclists and pedestrians also contribute when they ride down one-way bike lanes in the wrong direction, run out in front of cyclists and drivers without bothering to look, and more.

The roads, bike lanes, and sidewalks all function as a transportation system and users interact with this system according to a set of laws. When these laws go unenforced for long periods of time it creates a broken system of lawlessness.

Mayor Vincent Gray has called for a 25% mode share for walking and cycling by 2032. To reach this goal, sustained and consistent traffic enforcement will become pivotal. The city doesn't need any more public safety campaigns, advertisements, lip service, and promises. We need results.

120 comments

LaHood talks tough on bike safety

Mon, 15 Apr 2013 08:33:00 EDT

by Steven Yates

USDOT Secretary Ray LaHood called for "zero tolerance for people who don't respect cyclists," and will give more support for bike lanes on a national level. (Streetsblog)

Comment

A misinformed driver almost right hooked me

Wed, 10 Apr 2013 13:20:00 EDT

by Matt Johnson

Tuesday morning, I was commuting along my normal route by bicycle when a driver almost hit me in a "right hook" turn. I wasn't especially surprised by that, which is sadly very common, but I was surprised by her reaction.

I commute from Greenbelt to Silver Spring. Generally when I bike, I ride 7 miles to College Park Metro, and park in the bike cage there before continuing my commute by Metro. Much of my route is on off-street paths or streets with bike lanes. Ivy Lane, where this incident occurred, does have bike lanes in both directions.

Image from Google Street View.

Ivy Lane is a short street between Kenilworth Avenue and Cherrywood Lane, near the Greenbelt Metro station. It passes through a suburban office park, but because it connects Old Greenbelt with the Metro and Greenbelt West, it is very popular with cyclists.

As I crested the hill on Ivy, I began to pick up speed. About this time, a platoon of cars released by the light at Kenilworth Avenue began to pass me. Most gave me a wide berth, moving into the left-turn lane to pass me, even though I was in the bike lane.

The first of the cars in this platoon was a silver sedan, and as we approached the entrance to 6404/6406 Ivy Lane, the car signaled and turned right without first moving into the bike lane. That car was about 2 car-lengths ahead of me when the driver turned. The second car continued straight ahead.

Then the third car, a maroon Ford Explorer, began to pass me. As the rear wheel was even with my handlebars, the driver initiated her right turn into 6404/6406. I jammed on the brakes, and swerved toward the curb. I missed colliding with her vehicle by less than 6 inches.

As it happened, the security guard who patrols this office park was waiting to turn out of the same driveway. As I was avoiding the collision, I yelled loudly, and having witnessed the near miss and hearing me yell, the guard quickly turned around and went after the motorist. I followed.

When I caught up to the guard, he had flagged down the driver and was talking to her. As I biked up, I heard her say, "I didn't hit him." I responded, "You only missed me by about 6 inches."

Her response stunned me, and probably goes a long way to describing the plight of cyclists in this country. She said to the guard and me:

I had my signal on. You were supposed to stop for me.

In the first place, this is completely inaccurate. When driving on a street with bike lanes, the bike lane is considered a regular lane. You always have to yield to cyclists in the bike lane if you need to turn across it.

And the appropriate maneuver is to first merge into the bike lane before turning right. In this case, she should have merged behind me, since she did not have room to pass first.

In the second place, because she initiated the turn before she passed me, I really had no way of knowing that her signal was on anyway. Yes, cars have signals on the front, too. But as the front of her car passed me, I was focused on watching the car in front of her, because I did want to be right hooked by that driver either.

The woman told the security guard, "I really need to go. I don't have time for this." And I said, "I'm happy to let you go, but first I want to make sure you understand what you did wrong. You could have seriously injured me or killed me."

I explained that she should have moved into the bike lane first. I also said that if she didn't believe me, that she should look up the law for herself.

She said "sorry." (By her tone, she clearly wasn't).

I told her that I didn't want her to be sorry. I wanted her to not do this again.

At this point, we both went on our ways. But I thought about the experience for the rest of my ride.

I wondered whether I should have acted differently following the near-miss. I did not call the police. I assumed (perhaps incorrectly) that since there was no contact, they wouldn't consider it worthy of followup. But a friend of mine who has had experiences like this in Greenbelt says that the GPD will follow up to educate a driver if a cyclist or pedestrian reports a tag number after an infraction.

It's clear that the Maryland Motor Vehicle Administration doesn't do enough to educate new drivers about how to interact with cyclists.

But the State Highway Administration and local jurisdictions could also do more. The woman who almost hit me was probably in her late-40s. No amount of improvement to the driving test would have captured her.

In my experience biking in this section of Greenbelt, the right hook is probably the most common issue.

It seems that drivers need to be better educated about how they're supposed to behave around cyclists. The Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices does include sign R4-4, which applies when a right turn lane is present to the right of the bike lane.

But the MUTCD does not seem to include any signage for when there is no right turn lane. I created a modified version of the R4-4, which could serve in situations like this. But it will likely take a while for anything new to make it into the MUTCD.

Left: Sign R4-4 from the MUTCD. Right: My modified version.

Local jurisdictions, though, could have a freer hand in situations like this. Ivy Lane, after all, is a Greenbelt city street.

The Greenbelt Police Department does have a history of doing targeted driver education and enforcement, so that's another way the city could work toward resolving the issue.

88 comments

How smart is Street Smart?

Wed, 10 Apr 2013 08:29:00 EDT

by David Alpert

The annual "Street Smart" road safety education campaign kicked off yesterday with ads of "tired" faces with tire tracks on them (ha). But would it be more effective to give people information they don't know? (TheWashCycle)

Comment

And...

Tue, 09 Apr 2013 08:58:00 EDT

by David Alpert

A cyclist was hit near the MLK memorial. (WashCycle) ... Bowie's railroad museum teaches homeschooled children about trains. (Gazette) ... New, pretty renderings are released of the proposed park for McMillan. (UrbanTurf)

Comment

What will get more families biking?

Thu, 28 Mar 2013 14:23:00 EDT

by Sandra Moscoso

Washington DC has made great strides over the past decade towards creating a vibrant bicycle culture. How well does this extend to families so far? How can bicycling be more appealing to families?

Families biking to school via Stanton Park

Recent research has found that children who bike or walk to school perform better. A Danish study found that exercise, including from biking or walking to school, helped kids concentrate better, while chauffured children had a poorer grasp of geography, another study found.

In spite of the benefits, there are a number of reasons why families may not choose to or be able to bike. The reason I most often hear from parents is safety (even when biking is convenient). I feel the same way. Too often, I have found myself biking with my children, following all road and safety rules, only to be overrun by a driver who sees my small children as obstacles, not a family.

Mayor Gray's sustainability plan sets goals for "safe, secure infrastructure for cyclists and pedestrians" with a target to "increase biking and walking to 25% of all commuter trips."

Part of this needs to be a concerted effort to focus on making it easier for children and families to commute to school and get around in general, by bike.

The city has programs aimed at stimulating families to bike. For families with school age children, the District Department of Transportation's (DDOT) offers the Safe Routes to school program, run by Jennifer Hefferan. She works with schools to support various types of active transportation models, including biking.

At my own children's school, Jennifer has designed more efficient drop-off and pick up processes, helped us to get appropriate signage, and worked with us to develop a comprehensive longer-term safe routes plan for our school. On biking, DC's Safe Routes program coordinated with the Washington Area Bicyclist Association (WABA) to triple the number of bike racks for the school, as well as advise and support us on efforts like Bike to School Day and Fuel Free Fridays.

There are also advocacy organizations like WABA, who offer safety and skills education opportunities, including Bike Rodeos for children. KidicalMassDC promotes "safe, fun family biking in the Greater Washington area" by holding regular mass family rides and teaming up with DDOT, WABA and bicycle shops like BicycleSpace and the Daily Rider to host the ABC's of Family Biking.

Personally, I find programs like ABCs of Family Biking particularly compelling, because they bring together a comprehensive community of stakeholders invested in promoting family biking. There are opportunities to learn from each other, practice skills, and discover gear that makes sense for individual needs and lifestyles.

What seems to be lacking, however, is education (and skill-building) directed at drivers. Those who bike spend time learning how to co-exist with drivers, but until drivers learn to co-exist with cyclists, families will continue to face safety-related obstacles when considering whether or not to bike.

What obstacles do you see to getting your family or other families to bike?

64 comments

And...

Tue, 12 Mar 2013 08:37:00 EDT

by David Alpert

A bicyclist was killed in downtown Silver Spring, apparently while doing several dangerous things. (WashCycle) ... Bike shopes outnumbered car shops 7 to 1 in 1903. (WashCycle) ... How about digital libraries on buses and trains? (Atlantic Cities)

Comment

And...

Thu, 07 Mar 2013 08:41:00 EDT

by Steven Yates

Bike advocates come to DC to ask Congress for more infrastructure. (WAMU) ... The DC government will get all its power from wind. (DCist) ... Bike crashes rise 26% from the previous year in Fairfax County, and police are working on mapping them. (FABB)

Comment

A new standard

Fri, 01 Mar 2013 08:21:00 EDT

by Steven Yates

The US Department of Transportation is going to create its own bike and ~~predestination~~ pedestrian safety standards, instead of just relying on the often-outdated AASHTO ones. (Streetsblog)

Comment

For bicyclists, there is safety in numbers (May 6, 2010)
Around the network: Using the hive mind to make biking safer (Jun 2, 2009)

Bike bits

Tue, 26 Feb 2013 08:27:00 EDT

by David Alpert

Bills for bike safety all failed in Virginia this year. (VABike) ... A cyclist was "critically injured" on Maryland Avenue SW. (Post) ... Want to work for WABA?

Comment

Cyclist's life worth $140?

Fri, 22 Feb 2013 09:05:00 EDT

by David Alpert

A driver rear-ended a cyclist on the shoulder of Route 3 in Prince George's County, killing her. The driver pled guilty to negligent driving; her sentence: a $140 fine. (Bowie Blade)

Comment

12 ways our region could reform bicycling laws (Jan 22, 2010)
Two cases where reporters, police don't dismiss crashes (Apr 7, 2009)
Halsey veers from bike tragedy to ethnic generalizations (May 24, 2010)
Cyclist treatment: MPD 1, MoCo police 0 (Jan 20, 2010)
Prosecuting negligent driving is tough; time for new laws? (Jan 12, 2011)

Bike safer

Wed, 20 Feb 2013 08:05:00 EDT

by Steven Yates

A new cycling bill introduced by Councilmembers Wells and Cheh would put questions about bike safety on DC's driver's license test, require safe detours around construction, and increase penalties for drivers who fail to yield to cyclists. (WashCycle)

Comment

Council balks at bike lane parking fines (Jul 16, 2008)
Council passes fine for blocking bike lane (Sep 16, 2008)
DC Council bill would lower traffic camera fines (Oct 16, 2012)
Councilmembers who rarely walk block shoveling bill (Feb 7, 2012)
Gray slightly tweaks camera fines to stave off larger change (Nov 2, 2012)

Where the bike crashes are

Tue, 19 Feb 2013 07:55:00 EDT

by Steven Yates

MV Jantzen created a map plotting the crashes involving bikes in DC based on DDOT's recent report on bike crashes. Though that data is likely not catching all the crashes. (WashCycle)

Comment

Cyclists: Report bike potholes for Potholepalooza (Mar 22, 2011)
"War on cars" lives as AAA knocks L St. bike lane (Oct 24, 2012)
Arlington, DC announce 1,100-bike regional bike sharing (May 21, 2010)
Bike news (Jul 3, 2009)
Are protected bike lanes actually more dangerous? (Jan 14, 2008)

Dangerous intersections

Fri, 15 Feb 2013 08:40:00 EDT

by Steven Yates

DDOT has released its list of the most crash-prone intersections for bikes and pedestrians. 14th and U NW was the most dangerous for bikes, and Martin Luther King Jr. Avenue and Howard Road SE saw the most crashes involving pedestrians. (DCist)

Comment

Bad scheduling kills door bill

Fri, 15 Feb 2013 08:40:00 EDT

by Steven Yates

Virginia's dooring bill failed in committee possibly thanks to the fact that a third of the committee did not vote. 4 likely yes votes from Northern Virginia were at other committee meetings. (Post)

Comment

Virginia Senate kills bad anti-livability, WMATA board bills (Feb 22, 2011)
Anti-livability bill passes Virginia House committee (Jan 27, 2011)
Small steps can help bicycling in Virginia (Jan 4, 2013)
McDonnell trying again to take WMATA seat from NoVA (Mar 31, 2011)
Virginia Republican pursuing vendetta against Arlington for not wanting to be a "giant interchange" (Jan 25, 2011)

Door freely, wear a helmet

Wed, 13 Feb 2013 08:46:00 EDT

by David Alpert

Bike advocates testified against the Maryland helmet bill, while Nancy Floreen argued for it. Meanwhile, Chap Petersen's anti-dooring bill failed on a tie vote in a Virginia house committee. (Baltimore Sun, WashCycle)

Comment

Small steps can help bicycling in Virginia (Jan 4, 2013)
McDonnell trying again to take WMATA seat from NoVA (Mar 31, 2011)
Maryland helmet law would make cyclists less safe (Feb 11, 2013)
What killed the Prince George's County bag bill? (Mar 27, 2012)
COG climate change report briefing tomorrow (Aug 25, 2008)

Maryland helmet law would make cyclists less safe

Mon, 11 Feb 2013 10:01:00 EDT

by Shane Farthing

On Tuesday morning, the Environmental Matters Committee of the Maryland House of Delegates will hold a hearing on House Bill 339, to require that every person operating a bicycle in Maryland wear a helmet. This bill is bad policy.

Photo by Richard Masoner / Cyclelicious on Flickr.

Mandatory helmet laws cause fewer people to bicycle, and when fewer people bicycle, cycling becomes less safe. So much less safe, in fact, that decreased ridership increases the individual cyclist's risk of injury more than wearing a helmet decreases risk of injury.

This does not mean that bicyclists should not wear helmets. We encourage bicyclists to wear helmets. However, there are several reasons why people who are deeply committed to bicyclist safety oppose mandatory helmet laws.

Mandatory helmet laws decrease ridership.

Numerous studies of places that have enacted helmet laws have shown this to be true. The most commonly-cited study—Dorothy Robinson's "No Clear Evidence from Countries that have Enforced the Wearing of Helmets"—examined data from New Zealand, from Nova Scotia, Canada, and from several states in Australia. In each place, the mandatory helmet law significantly decreased ridership, from 20% to 44% with an average of 37.5%.

(One can debate whether Maryland can expect a decrease of this magnitude. There is no local data available, so this analysis uses the average of 37.5%. But even if the decrease is only 20%, the lowest Robinson observed, even half of that, the result is the same.)

Lower ridership makes bicycling less safe.

We are defining "safety" as the likelihood of a bike-auto crash. By saying that decreased ridership makes bicycling less safe, we mean that a decreased rate of bicycling within a population is correlated with increased crash rates, and vice versa.

The leading article on this topic—Peter Jacobsen's "Safety in Numbers: More Walkers and Bicyclists, Safer Walking and Bicycling"—reviews data on biking, walking, and injury rates in 68 California cities, 47 Danish towns, 14 European countries, and the United Kingdom.

Across the independent sets of data from these many jurisdictions, Jacobsen finds a consistent, inverse, curvilinear relationship between bicycling and injury rates, determining that "the total number of pedestrians or bicyclists struck by motorists varies with the 0.4 power of the amount of walking or bicycling respectively." Expressed simply, more people biking leads to fewer per capita crashes while fewer people biking leads to more per capita crashes.

Jacobsen also derives a formula for how this affects the individual cyclist: "Taking into account the amount of walking and bicycling, the probability that a motorist will strike an individual person walking or bicycling declines with roughly -0.6 power of the number of persons walking or bicycling." In other words, as more people bicycle, the per capita risk to each bicyclist of a crash decreases; if fewer people bicycle, the per capita risk to each bicyclist increases.

Helmets do not make cyclists as much safer as commonly thought.

For the individual, of course, the story is different. Wearing a helmet is likely safer than not wearing one. This is true for bicyclists; it is also true for people who are skydiving, rock climbing, sitting under an oak tree, or taking a bath. Individually, we make our decisions based on our own risk tolerances and values, and many of us choose to wear helmets and encourage our loved ones to do so.

But at the broader level, where we ought to analyze legislation and public policy, how much safer will a helmet make a person in a bike crash that leads to a head impact? This is a topic of debate and uncertainty, but as research methods improve we move further from some of the magical thinking that took hold due to early estimates—derived from emergency room data rather than population data—that suggested helmet effectiveness rates of 85% and above.

Generally, those estimates came from retrospective studies that looked at people with head injuries in emergency rooms and compared the numbers who lived and died, and whether they were wearing helmets when they were hit. When more recent studies have attempted to compile these data into meta-analyses with more informative sample sizes, their results do not approach the long-accepted 85% level. Some show a smaller effect; others, none at all. In fact, in population-level studies focusing on hospitalization rather than emergency room visits, helmets have no discernible, statistically significant effect on hospitalization rates. (Jacobsen 2012)

Recent studies that have focused on overall health, rather than simply crash mortality rates, have shown that the individual and public health benefits grossly outweigh the costs, by a factor of 20:1. (De Jong 2012)

The mandatory helmet law in Maryland will increase danger for Maryland cyclists.

Assuming that the helmet law will decrease cycling by the 37.5% average in Maryland, the total Maryland cycling population, post helmet law, would shrink to only 62.5% of the current cycling population. Assuming also that Jacobsen's safety-in-numbers effect holds true in Maryland—as it has consistently throughout California and across Europe—the number of motorists colliding with people bicycling will increase by roughly 17.1% per capita (1-0.625^0.4=0.171)

For the individual, these assumptions mean that the likelihood of injury from a crash with a motor vehicle would increase by roughly 33% (0.625^-0.6=1.326)—regardless of whether the individual wears a helmet. The increased risk comes solely because mandatory helmet laws take people off bicycles, and fewer people on bicycles makes the remaining bicyclists less safe. Substantially.

Maryland does not keep much data on bicycling, but one piece of data that we do have is that in 2010, there were 734 reported bicycle crashes in Maryland. Looking only at this data—and assuming ridership decreases by 37.5% from the helmet law in Maryland—we might expect only 459 crashes instead of 734.

However, this expectation is wrong. Due to the decreasing "safety in numbers," we would instead expect to see 537 crashes, or 78 additional crashes directly attributable to the mandatory helmet law. So even though the total number of crashes might decrease, that is not because the law has made cyclists safer; it is because substantially fewer people are riding bikes, and those that still ride are measurably less safe, because of the law.

Discouraging cycling runs counter to other Maryland priorities.

The state of Maryland has launched, or is poised to launch, two programs dedicated to encouraging cycling. The mandatory helmet law would undermine the success and safety of both.

First, knowing the overall benefits of biking to public health and well-being, transportation, economic development, and other public priorities, the state of Maryland initiated a campaign to get more people riding bikes. Maryland's Department of Transportation introduces the campaign on their website with:

Governor O'Malley's Cycle Maryland initiative is an effort to encourage more Marylanders to get out and ride, and to make bicycling a true transportation alternative. Cycling is a great way to connect to your community, support a cleaner environment, encourage a healthier lifestyle, reduce household transportation costs and enjoy Maryland's magnificent landscape.

With the mandatory helmet law reducing ridership, Maryland will be left with more people to figure out how to move, and will have to treat more people for health problems associated with sedentary lifestyles.

Second, Maryland has contributed funds to expand the popular and successful Capital Bikeshare program to Montgomery County. Due to the nature of bikesharing, users are less likely to wear helmets, more likely to be casual rather than experienced users, and more likely to be operating in urban environments with motor vehicles. So perhaps the legislators proposing this mandatory helmet bill mean to ensure the safety of those riders, before bikesharing arrives in the state?

However, again, consider the data: Capital Bikeshare users have logged over 3.4 million trips, with an approximately 38% lower helmet usage rate than the general population. (Kraemer 2012) There have been zero fatalities and only one head injury. That is roughly one crash for every 88,000 miles ridden! Yet by driving potential cyclists away, a mandatory helmet policy would undermine the likelihood of success of the program in Montgomery County, Baltimore, and other areas statewide.

That safety record speaks for itself and shows that biking is not an inherently dangerous activity. Mandatory bicycle helmet laws falsely portray it as such, and in doing so create a false sense of danger that limits ridership and undermines the many positive impacts of mass cycling for Maryland.

"Contributory negligence" makes the law extra harmful.

And finally, some believe that this law is acceptable and benevolent and will not have these impacts because there is no fine for violation. But this law has other, even more dire consequences for violators.

Maryland, like the District and Virginia, is a "contributory negligence" jurisdiction. That means if the victim of a crash contributed in any way to her own injury, she can claim no civil recovery for her damages. In Maryland, violation of a law is negligence per se.

Thus, it is possible that a cyclist who rides the bus to work on a rainy morning but chooses to take a bikeshare bike home when the weather clears, and suffers permanent brain injury when a drunk driver veers into a bike lane and strikes her, could be denied any civil recovery as a result of not wearing a helmet.

Is this the transportation future we want in Maryland? Is this the sort of public policy we hope to encourage?

Conclusion

In Maryland, we can anticipate a mandatory helmet law to reduce bicycle ridership by 37.5% (along with its accompanying public health, environmental, and economic benefits), per capita crashes to increase by 17%, and the per capita risk of a crash to increase by 33% for every person riding a bike in the state of Maryland, regardless of whether he or she wears a helmet.

In a broader sense, these laws are a form of victim blaming—telling bicyclists that it is our responsibility to avoid the risk of injury by padding ourselves, rather than the state's to design a transportation network capable of moving non-motorists with a decent level of safety and efficiency.

WABA opposes a mandatory helmet law in Maryland because it is bad policy based on accepted, tested, and peer-reviewed data—not just some libertarian philosophy or desire of cyclists to "feel the wind in our hair."

Fundamentally, we do believe that the legislators proposing this mandatory helmet law hope to do what is best for bicyclist safety, but they have significantly erred in determining what will, in fact, be best. They have the power to impose new risks on each of us who rides a bike, even when we wear helmets. We hope they will consider this information seriously and decide that a mandatory helmet law is a bad policy for the state of Maryland.

References:

De Jong, Piet. 2012. The Health Impact of Mandatory Bicycle Helmet Laws. Risk Analysis. 5 (32): 782-790.

Jacobsen, Peter L. 2003. Safety in Numbers: More Walkers and Bicyclists, Safer Walking and Bicycling. Injury Prevention 9 (3): 205-209.

Jacobsen, Peter L. and Harry Rutter. "Cycling Safety" City Cycling. Ed. John Pucher, Ed. Ralph Buehler. Cambridge: MIT Press, 2012. 141-156.

Kraemer, John D., Jason S. Roffenbender, and Laura Anderko. 2012. Helmet Wearing Among Users of a Public Bicycle-Sharing Program in the District of Columbia and Comparable Riders on Personal Bicycles. American Journal of Public Health 102 (8): e23-e25.

Robinson, Dorothy L. 1996. No Clear Evidence from Countries that Have Enforced the Wearing of Helmets. British Medical Journal 332 (7543): 722-725.

177 comments

And...

Thu, 07 Feb 2013 08:35:00 EDT

by Steven Yates

Car2go breaks the 10,000 member mark in DC. (UrbanTurf) ... How effective are bike helmets? (WashCycle) ... Should DC bring HOV rules to local roads? (RPUS)

Comment

Innovative, flexible car sharing coming to DC with car2go (Jul 20, 2011)

VDOT ignores pleas, crash happens

Wed, 06 Feb 2013 08:48:00 EDT

by David Alpert

A cyclist tries in vain to get VDOT and Fairfax County to post signs, paint lines, or do anything about a spot on Richmond Highway that's a crash waiting to happen. Then, he gets hit at that very spot. (FABB)

Comment

Halsey veers from bike tragedy to ethnic generalizations (May 24, 2010)
Turn Richmond Highway back into a string of distinct places (Jun 26, 2012)
VDOT was supposed to install signal where pedestrian killed (Oct 17, 2010)
VDOT ignores own data, pushes widening I-66 (May 17, 2012)
Richmond Highway revitalizing, but many challenges remain (Mar 5, 2012)

"Embarrassing" anti-dooring law?

Tue, 15 Jan 2013 08:28:00 EDT

by Thaddeus Bell

Some people seem not to read past the title of Virginia's proposed anti-dooring bill, like one Norfolk columnist who calls it an "embarrassing" proposal which "epitomizes all that's wrong with Richmond" without mentioning the actual serious problems dooring poses. (Post)

Comment

Virginia Senate kills bad anti-livability, WMATA board bills (Feb 22, 2011)
Virginia Republican pursuing vendetta against Arlington for not wanting to be a "giant interchange" (Jan 25, 2011)
Small steps can help bicycling in Virginia (Jan 4, 2013)
Where's Bob? McDonnell MIA on Metro funding (Feb 16, 2011)
McDonnell trying again to take WMATA seat from NoVA (Mar 31, 2011)

DDOT promises better lighting on Metropolitan Branch Trail

Mon, 07 Jan 2013 14:31:00 EDT

by Geoff Hatchard

Perenially dark lights on the Metropolitan Branch Trail have frustrated cyclists for quite some time, but DDOT says they will do better in the future, and some fixes are coming in the near term.

Photo by Elvert Barnes on Flickr.

After I wrote about lighting problems on the Metropolitan Branch Trail, DDOT spokesman John Lisle shared some plans to upgrade and maintain lighting along the trail.

Lisle said:

Obviously they are not performing as well as we'd like and we are working with the contractor to get them all up and running again. Heather [Deutsch, in the bicycle planning group], has led this charge over the past year and the lighting team is working on it as well.

They inventoried the lights and here's a summary of what they found:
22 lights were out, 2 of which were missing the entire fixture

4 lights with blown fuses were repaired on the spot

36 batteries failed the test

1 electronic controller failed test

32 fixtures were loose at the arm mount and the contractor was able to tighten all of the fixtures.

We have contacted the vendor and they are preparing to ship the batteries by [December 11th] and will make preparations to have the two missing fixtures sent at a later time. They also will replace the broken electronic controller.
In addition we are providing temporary lights for the New York Avenue Bridge Project contractor to install under that bridge to light the trail.

Lisle also promised an update once most of the lights have been fixed.

One challenge that has impeded fixing lights is that no group was formally responsible for this. Deutsch and the other bicycle planners, part of DDOT's Policy, Planning, and Sustainability Administration, are responsible for planning and designing new bicycle facilities, but not ongoing maintenance.

There's a group that handles streetlights, and that's part of the Traffic Operations Administration. It would be logical for them to maintain trail lights as well. Soumya Dey, acting head of TOA, said that DDOT has been operating under an emergency temporary contract for streetlights while they work out a permanent contract. The current contract doesn't encompass trail lighting, but Dey said that the new one would.

If DDOT can fix some of the lighting now, including getting some under the dark New York Avenue bridge during construction, and then make trail lighting part of some division's long-term maintenance responsibilities, we can hope trail users need not suffer for long.

10 comments

Lights out on the MBT? You're on your own, DC cyclists (Dec 5, 2012)
NoMa project maximizes Met Branch Trail access (Feb 23, 2012)
911 dispatchers not aware of Metropolitan Branch Trail (Jun 16, 2010)
DDOT defines Met Branch Trail options to the north (Nov 15, 2010)
A timeline of the Metropolitan Branch Trail (Aug 27, 2010)

Where's the crashiest

Mon, 07 Jan 2013 08:51:00 EDT

by David Alpert

DDOT released a list of the 10 intersections with the most bicycle crashes. Number 1 is 16th, U, and New Hampshire NW. (WashCycle)

Comment

And...

Tue, 18 Dec 2012 08:24:00 EDT

by Thaddeus Bell

Check out this collection of old DC transit photos (BeyondDC) ... Britain also rarely prosecutes drivers who injure or kill cyclists. (ibikelondon, movement) ... DCist runs through the wide range of Metro-themed gifts available.

Comment

MPD not interested in investigating cyclist intimidation (Aug 26, 2008)
Could green zebra striping improve cycle track crossings? (Aug 21, 2011)
Arlington then and now (Nov 4, 2010)
Then and Now: The Schneider mansion (Nov 14, 2008)
Mendelson: "We're being too easy on drivers" who kill (Mar 22, 2010)

Lights out on the MBT? You're on your own, DC cyclists

Wed, 05 Dec 2012 14:56:00 EDT

by Geoff Hatchard

The Metropolitan Branch Trail is a terrific bike facility, but without better lighting, it's too attractive for crime. Sadly, it takes repeated emergencies like robberies to get our government to pay attention.

Photo by Eric Gilliland on Flickr.

On Tuesday night at 9 pm, I rode the off-street part of the trail from Franklin Street NE, south to M Street NE, and counted 19 overhead lights (as well as 5 lights on the ramp to street level) that were burned out, missing, or flashing like a strobe.

I stopped a police officer on the trail to ask if the police would have any more success advocating for working lighting on the trail than regular citizens would. Sadly, the officer said I should just email the city or call 311, as he had no more pull on this issue than I did.

Just over an hour later, MPD reported a robbery by 8-9 masked youth, armed with a gun, on the "1400 block" of the trail.

One would assume that's between where O and P Streets would intersect the trail, based on address ranges elsewhere. That is the location of the New York Avenue bridge over the trail, which has been bathed in utter darkness since the trail opened.

There have been constant problems with the overhead lights. The light just south of the Franklin Street overpass has been flashing like a strobe since October 2011 (over a year), and nothing has been done about it. DDOT employee Heather Deutch wrote on the MBT's Facebook page:

These are solar/LED lights. There is a 5 year warranty, with most components expected to last 10 years (i.e. batteries and lamps). This was a pilot project for us and the company is out of Florida. We have been having problems with the lights and with repairs being performed quickly. That being said, all the lights were repaired and working as of January 2012. There are, again, more lights out and we have submitted this information to the company. If you would like to contact them directly, the company is Sol www.solarlighting.com.

DDOT's bicycle program has few resources, but it's still unacceptable that they aren't able to keep the lights working. If there's a warranty, there should be an employee who deals with contracts who can get the necessary work done.

In addition, it's been clear that the stretch of the trail under the New York Avenue overpass would be a particularly dark place since that segment of the trail opened in May, 2010. The excuse for not placing lighting under the bridge was that it would soon be under construction (construction began in early 2011). That construction has been ongoing for nearly 2 years, and is not expected to be complete until September 2013.

New York Avenue bridge over the trail. Photo by Elvert Barnes on Flickr.

There's simply no rationale for not putting temporary lighting under the bridge. In addition to the all-too-real threat of crime, there's the current threat of severe injury because construction equipment takes up some of the space. David Poms noted on Twitter that he almost crashed into the construction material in the darkness.

The city needs to light the underpass now and until construction is complete with a long-term temporary solution, and then with a high-quality permanent solution after that point. Riders need to be able to see construction material or gangs of criminals waiting for them in the darkness.

31 comments

Montgomery and DC inaction threatens the Met Branch Trail (Feb 6, 2012)
A timeline of the Metropolitan Branch Trail (Aug 27, 2010)
NoMa's First Street will get first cycletrack in NE DC (May 30, 2012)
NoMa project maximizes Met Branch Trail access (Feb 23, 2012)
Police catch Met Branch Trail attackers, but dispatch problems remain (Jun 6, 2011)