bicycle planning for the national capital region
TRANSCRIPT
-
8/18/2019 Bicycle Planning for the National Capital Region
1/182
Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan for the
National Capital Region
July 2 6
National Capital Region Transportation Planning Board
-
8/18/2019 Bicycle Planning for the National Capital Region
2/182
Bicycle and Pedestrian
Plan
for the National Capital Region
CREDITS
Technical Oversight
Bicycle and Pedestri an Subcommittee
Of
the TPB Technica l Committee
Director Department of Transportation Planning
Ronald F. Kirby
Chief
Progt·am
Coordination
Gerald
K
Miller
Report
uthors
Michael J Farre
ll
Andrew Meese
Co
ntribut
ors
Andrew
Au
stin
Wendy Klancher
Jim Sebastian
Jim Yin
Credits
-
8/18/2019 Bicycle Planning for the National Capital Region
3/182
Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan T BLE OF CONTENTS
for the National Capital Region
CREDITS
TABLE OF CONTENTS
LIST OF FIGURES AND TABLES
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
INTRODUCTION
I. PLANNING CONTEXT
A. Overvic\IV
........................................................................................... 1 I
B.
Transportation Vision of the Transportation Planning Board ............ I l
C. TPB Actions to Encourage Walking and Bicycling ..........................
1 3
D.
TCSP Reports ..................... ...............................................................
1 3
E. Federa l and State Policies ..................................................................
1 5
F. Americans with
Di
sabil
ities
Act .................... ....................................
1 6
G.
SAFETEA LU ...................................................................................
1 7
H.
Safe Routes to School ........................................................................ I 7
I. Constrained Long Range Plan ...........................................................
1 8
J. Transportation Improvement Program............................................... 1 8
K. Local Bicycle and Pedestrian Plans Summary Table ...................... l 10
L. Local Bicycle and Pedest
ri
an Planning Staffing Table ................... l 11
M. Priority Unfunded Bicycle and Pedestrian Projects ........................ 1 12
N. Regional
Bi
cycle Plans .................................................................... I I4
0. Sources
of
the Regional Plan Projects ............................................. 1 14
P. Outlook ............................................................................................ 1 15
2.
BICYCLING AND WALKING
IN
THE WASHTNGTON REGION
A. Ovcrview ............................................................................................ 2 l
B. Jurisdictiona l Trends according to the
US
Census ............................ 2 2
C. Mode Share by Census Tract ............................................................. 2 4
D.
Bicycling
in
the Metro Core .............................................................. 2 9
E. Demographics
of
Pedestrian and Bicycle Commuters ....................
2 l
0
F. Commute Trip Distances ................................................................. 2 13
G.
Non work trips ................................................................................. 2 15
H. Walking and Bicycling to Transit .................................................... 2 16
I. Outlook ............................................................................................ 2 18
J.
Data Sources .................................................................................... 2 20
0 1
-
8/18/2019 Bicycle Planning for the National Capital Region
4/182
icycle and Pedestrian Plan
T BL
E OF CO
NT
E
NTS
for the National Capital Region
3. PED ESTRIAN AND BICYCLE SAFETY
A.
Overview..................................................................................... .......
3
1
B.
Scope
of
the Problem .................................. ..................................... ..
3 1
C.
Distribution
of
Fatalities and Injuries
by
Ju
ri
sdiction ........................ 3 3
D.
Factors Contributing
to
Pedestrian and Bicycle Crashes ................... 3 5
E. Legal Status of Pedestrians and Bicyclists......................................... 3 5
F. Street Smart Pedestrian and Bicycle Safety Campaign ................... 3 10
G. Evaluation Results ................................. ........ ............... ................... 3 1 I
H. Outlook ................................................ ........ ................ ...... .............. 3 1
1
4. EXISTING FACIUTIES FOR BICYCLISTS AND PEDESTRI
ANS
A.
Overview................................ ............................................................ 4 1
B. Shared Use Paths ............................................................................... 4 1
C. Side Paths .......................................................................................... 4 2
D. Bicycle Lanes.................................................................................... . 4 2
E. Dual Faci lities .................................................................................... 4 3
F. Signed Bicycle Routes .......................................................................
4 3
G.
Long distance Bicycle Routes ........................................................... 4 4
H. Exclusive Bus/Bike Lanes ..................... ............................................ 4 4
I.
1:3ridges ......... .... ..... ................ ...... ....................................... ................ 4 4
J.
Bicycles and Pub l
ic
Transit ............................................................... 4 5
K.
Pedest
rian
Access to Transit .............................................................. 4 6
L. Outlook ......... ................. ....... ................................ ........................ ..... 4 6
5. BEST PRACTICES
A. Enhance Agency Efforts
to
Incorporate Bicycle and Pedestrian
Elements in jurisdictional planning and design polices ................ 5 1
B. Develop and Adhere to Consistent Bicycle and Pedestrian Fac ility
and Construction Standards in each Jurisdiction ....................... 5 3
C. Improve Bicycle and Pedestrian Circulation within and between
Regional Activity Centers and the Urban Core .....
...................
5 4
D.
Integrate Bicycling and Walking into
the
Public Transportation
Systen1 ...................................................... . ................ 5 4
E. Provide Adequate Bicycle Support Faci lities .......................... 5 5
F. Develop Pedestrian and Bicycle Safety and Education and
Enforcement Programs in All Juri
sd
ictions ..
..........................
5 6
G.
Each Jurisdiction should Develop a High Visibi lity Bicycle or
Pedestrian
Pr
oject
..........................................................
5 8
H TPB Shall Compile and Report on Best Practices Regarding
Wayfinding and Signage for
Bi
cyclists and Pedestrians in the
0 2
-
8/18/2019 Bicycle Planning for the National Capital Region
5/182
Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan T BLE O CONTENTS
for the National Capital Region
Washington Region ........................................................ 5 9
6. THE 2030
BICYCLE
AND PEDESTRJAN NETWORK
A. Regional Bicycle and Pedestrian Network in 2030 ...........................
6 1
B. Cost
Estin1ates ............................................... .....................................
6 1
C. Exp
lanation
of
Project Listings ................. .................................. .. ..... 6 2
D. Maps
..... ........................ ....... .............................................................. 6 6
APPENDIX:
A. 2006 Plan Bicycle and Pedestrian Projects
B. Project Database
Data
Dictionary and Sample Database Entry Form
C. Bicycle and P
edest
rian Projects in th e CLRP
D. Bicycle and Pedestrian Projects in the TIP
E. Completed projects from the 1995 Bicycle Plan
F. Metro Core Cordon Counts
G. Table 2 10: Origin Station Sotied
by
Walk
Mode of
Access
H. Table 2 11: Origin Station Sorted by Bike
Mode
of Access
l Ta
bl
e 3 1: Bike racks and lockers
at
Metro Stations
J.
Links and Resources
K. Glossary
L. Glossary
of
Acronyms
M. Priorities
200
0 Projects
N. Bibliography
0-3
-
8/18/2019 Bicycle Planning for the National Capital Region
6/182
Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan
for the National
Capita
l Region
List
of
F igures, Tables,
Charts
List
of
Figures, Tables
Charts
Figures
i-1
, TPB Planning Area, Washington
DC -M
D-VA Metropol itan Statistical Area ...... .... .....i-4
1- 1, Sources of the Plan Projects .......................................................................................... 1-15
2-1, 2000 Bike Commute Mode Share .... ............................................................................. 2-5
2-2, 2000 Bike Commute Mode Share ........ .......... ............................................................... 2-6
2-3, 2000 Walk Commute Mode Share ........................................................................... .... . 2-7
2-4, 2000 Walk Commute Mode Share .................................................................. .............. 2-8
6-1, Major Bic
yc
le a
nd
Pedestrian Projects .......................................................................... 6-6
6-2, Major Bic
yc le
and Pedestrian Projec
ts in th
e Central Washington Region ......... ........ . 6-7
6-3, Major Bicycle a
nd
Pedestrian Projects included
in
the CLRP ................................. ..... 6-8
6-4, Major Bicycle and Pedestrian Projects in the Central Washington Region
included in the CLRP ................................... .. ............................... ........................................6-9
Tables
1-1 , Bicycle and Pedestr
ian
Provisions of the Transportation Vision .................................. l-2
1-
2, Major Bicycle and Pedestrian Plans and Studies of the Washington Region ............... 1-10
1-3 Agency Bicycl
e/
Pedestrian Planning Staff ................................. ................................
..
1-1
I
2-1, Pedestrian Commuting in the Ten Largest Metropolitan Areas ............................... .... 2- 1
2-2, Bicycle Commuting
in
the Ten Largest Metropolitan Areas ....................................... 2- 1
2-3, 2002 Metro Core
Co rd
on Counts ................................................................................. Appendix F
2-4, Bicycle Count on Radia l Transp01iation Facilities ............. .... ...................................... Appendix F
2
-5
, Walk/Bike Mode Share by NumberofVehicles ................. .......................................... 2-13
2-6, Commute Distance ......................................... .................................................. ............. 2-13
2-7, Wa
lk
and Bike Commute
Di
stance ............................................................................... 2-13
2-8, Distance
from
Home to Alternative Mode Meeting Point ........................................... . 2-14
2-9, Means ofGett
in
g from Home to Alternative Mode Meeting/Transfer Po
in
t ............... 2-14
2-l 0, Origin Station Sorted
by
Wa lk
Mode of Access ..................................................... Appendix G
2-
, Origin Station Sorted
by
Bike Mod e
of
Access ................................................... ... Appendix H
3-1 , Se lected Bicycle Ru les in the Washington Area ................................................... ... ..... 3-6
3-2, Pedestrian Traffic Law - Motor Vehicles .......................... ........................................... 3-7
3-3, Pedestrian Traffic
Law-
Pedestrians ............................. ............................................... 3-9
3-4, Fatalities 200
1-
2004 ...................................................................................................... 3-11
6- 1. Miles of Bicycle/Pedestrian Faci
liti
es in the Washington Region ............................ .... 6-1
6-2, Imputed Costs ................................................................................................................ 6-2
6-3, Mapped Pedes
tri
an a
nd
Bicycle Projects .......................................................................6-3
-
8/18/2019 Bicycle Planning for the National Capital Region
7/182
Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan
for the National Capital R gion
Charts
List of Figures Tables
C rts
2-1 Percentage of Workers Walk
in
g to Work ............................................................... ...... 2-3
2-2 Percentage
of
Workers Biking to Work .......................................... ..... ...... ................... 2-3
2-3 Bicycling
in
the
Metro Co
re ......................................................................................... 2-9
2-4 Walk/Bike Co
mmut
e Mode Share by Annual Household Income ...... .................. ...... . 2- 11
2-5 Walk/Bike Co
mmut
e Mode S hare by Ethnicity ..................... ..... ...... ........................ 2-11
2-6
Wa
lk/Bike Commute Mode Share by ge .............. ..... .......... .................................. 2-12
2-7
Estimated Bicycle T rips from the COG Household Travel Survey .............................. 2-16
3- 1 Average Annual Pedestrian and Bicyclist Fatalities in the Washington Reg ion
1994-2004 ....................... .... .......... ..... ................................................................................. 3-2
3-2
Pedestrian Bi
cyc
list
and
Motorized Traffic Fatalities in the Washington Region
1994-2004 ···························· ···················································· ·································· ··········· 3-2
3-3 Average Amlllal Pedestrian and Bicyclist Fatalities 1994-2003 ................... .
...... .... .. 3-3
3-4 Average Annual Pedest rian and Bicycl ist Fata
li
ties per l 00 000 people 1994-2003 3-4
2
-
8/18/2019 Bicycle Planning for the National Capital Region
8/182
xecutive Summary
-
8/18/2019 Bicycle Planning for the National Capital Region
9/182
icycle and Pedestrian Plan
Executive Summary
for the National Capital Region
erview
The
Bicycle
nd
Pedestrian Plan for the National Capital Region
identifies the capital
improvements, studies, actions, and strategies that the region proposes to catTy out by 2030 for
major bicycle and
pedestrian fac ilities.
The
National Capita l Region Transportation Planning
Board TPB), composed
of
governments and agencies from around metropolitan Washington,
has developed this plan with the support
of
its Bicycle and Pedestrian Subcommittee. The plan
builds upon the 1998
TPB Vision
to guide the region s transportation investments into the 21st
Century. Th is is the first al l-new regional plan specifically for bicycle faci
li
ties since 1995, and
represents the first-ever regiona l pedestrian facilities plan.
In
addition to building upon the
TPB Vision
the
Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan
for
the National
Capital Region
draws on and has been shaped by a number of regional , state, and local policy
statements, plans, and studies. These include the TPB s Transportation nd Community nd
System Preservation Greenways and Circulation Systems Reports published in 2001); the TPB s
regularly updated Constrained Long Range Plan CLRP) and Transportation Improvement
Program TIP); federal and state guidance on bicycle and pedestrian faci li ties; and a wealth of
state and local bicycle and pedestrian plans from around the region.
The Bicycle
nd
Pedestrian Plan for the National Capital Region
is intended to be advisory to
the CLRP and TIPs, and to stand as a resource for planners and the public. In contrast to the
CLRP, the
Bicycle
nd
Pedestrian Plan
includes both funded and unfunded projects - projects
in
this plan may not yet have funding identified to support their implementation.
Planning Context
A number of federal , state, and local activities, as noted above, provide the planning context
Chapter 1 for this document. Jurisdictions and agencies around the region maintain active
bicycle and pedestrian planning and coordination programs. Within this context, the TPB
incorporates bicycle and pedestrian considerations into overall regional transpottation planning,
bike-to-work components of the Commuter Connections program, and the reg ion s Access for
A
ll
Committee co ncerning minority, low-income, and disabled communities. The TPB supports
bicycling and walking and their h
ea
lth, community, pollution reduction, and congestion
reducti
on
benefits for the region.
icycling and Walking n the National Capital Region
The state of bicycling and walking in the Washington region Chapter 2) includes success
stories, challenges, and opportunities for improvement. Data from the U.S. Census, surveys, and
E-1
-
8/18/2019 Bicycle Planning for the National Capital Region
10/182
Bicycle
and
Pedestrian Plan Executive Summary
for the National Capital Region
other
sources provide an understanding
of
where bicycling and walking are found throughout the
region, as well as who
is
walking and bicycling. These data may point to opportunities fo r
increasing the
se
activities, and support the need to consider bicycling and walking in overall
roadway and transit planning and engineering.
Safety
Bicycle and pedestrian safety (Chapter 3) is a key challenge for the region. The plan describes
the scope of the safety problem, its geographic and demographic i stribution across the region,
and the legal rights and responsibilities
of
drivers, pedestrians, and bicyclists. Unfortunately,
throughout the region bicycle and pedestrian safety issues are found.
The
region and member
agencies are actively pursuing a number of engineering, enforcement, and educational strategies
to reduce deaths and injuries.
Existing Facilities
The Washington reg ion benefits from a number of popular bicycle and pedestrian facilities in
place in
our
communities (Chapter 4). The region s transit agencies have also worked to provide
access and accommodation of bicycling and walking to and on their systems. A goal
of
this plan
is to complement
and
augment the existing system
of
facilities.
Best Practices
Conveni
ent
and safe bicycle
and pede
strian access is a key goa l of the TPB
s Vision
To help
achieve this, the Bicycle and Pedestrian Subcommittee developed a set of recommended best
practices (Chapter 5) for the design and implementation of bicycle and pedestrian facilities, as
well as for the
in
corpora tion
of
bicycl ing and walking considerations into overall roadway and
trans it design. Best practices are based upon nationa l and sta te Jaws and gu idelines.
Planned Bicycle and
Pe
de
strian
Facilities a
nd Impr
ovements
Improvements included on the plan
s
list
of
r
eg
iona l bicycle and pedestrian projects (overview
in
Chapter 6 and the full li
st
ing
in
Appendix A) were identified, submitted an reviewed by agency
staffs
ofTP
B member jurisdictions.
The
plan includes approx imately 350 bicycle
an
d
pede
strian
facility improvement projects from across the region. If evety project
in
the
plan
were
implemented, in 2030 the region will have added over 200 miles of bicyc le lanes, over 400 miles
of shared-use paths, hundreds of miles of s igned bicycle routes (signage without additional
E 2
-
8/18/2019 Bicycle Planning for the National Capital Region
11/182
icycle and Pedestrian Plan Executive Summary
o
r the National Capital R
eg
ion
construction), more than 50 pedestrian intersection improvements, and a number of
pedestrian/bicycle bridges or tunnels. Two new bicycle and pedestrian crossings
over
the
Potomac wou ld be created, at the American Legion and Woodrow Wilson Bridges, and bridges
over the Anacostia Ri
ver
wou ld be improved for pedestrians and bicyclists. n addition, major
streetscaping projects wou
ld
improve pedestrian and bicycle access and amenities
in
Ballston,
Bethesda, Clifton, H
ayma
rket, Manassas, Tysons
Co
rner and other locations.
Costs
Total estimated
cost
of
projects in the draft plan is about
530
mi
Ilion (2006 dollars).
35%
of
the
plan projects have specific agency-submitted cos t estimates, totaling about $190 million of the
530 million. About 110 million
ofthe
190 million is for projects included
in
the CLRP.
For
the remaining
65% of
draft plan listings project-speci fie cost estimates were not available. Tota l
estimated cost for projects without an agency-submitted estimate was imputed on a mileage and
project type basis
at
about $340 million of the $530 million. Cost estimates should
be
considered as order-of-magnitude and in most cases do not reflect engineering-level estimates.
On
L
ne Resources
Development
of
the Bicycle nd Pedestrian Plan for the National Capital Region has benefited
from an on-1ne plan project database, a resource separate from the printed document. For the
first time, Bicycle and Pedestrian Subcommittee members were ab le to v iew, enter, a
nd
ed it their
project listings on-line. This on-line database will facilitate keeping the regional list accurate
and up-to-date, and wi ll fac ili tate integration of information fi·om this plan into the region's
Constrained Long Range Plan and Transp01iati
on
Improve ment Progra m as necessary. An on
line version of this plan also wi
ll
be maintained for pub lic access on the TPB
's
Web site at
http://\\\\ w.m\\CO .org, under transportation/planning activities/bicycle and pedestrian planning.
Outlook
Overall, the TPB s Vision calls for convenient, safe bicycle and pedestrian access, walkability in
regional ac tivity centers and the urban core, reduced reliance on the automobile, increased
walking and bicycling overall, inclusion of bicycle and pedestrian facilities
in
new transportation
projects and improvements, and implementation of a regiona l bicycle and pedestrian plan.
The
Bicycle
nd
Pedestrian Plan
for
the National Capital Region provides a bluepr
in
t for making the
reg ion a better place for bicycling and wa lking.
E 3
-
8/18/2019 Bicycle Planning for the National Capital Region
12/182
icycle
and
Pedestrian Plan Executive Summary
for the National apital Region
-
8/18/2019 Bicycle Planning for the National Capital Region
13/182
ntroduction
-
8/18/2019 Bicycle Planning for the National Capital Region
14/182
Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan INTRODUCTION
for th e National Capital Region
Bicy ling Walking and the Vision
of the Transportation Planning Boar
Th e National Capital Region Transportation Planning Board has long recogni zed the benefits of
bicycling and wa lking in the region 's mu lti-moda l transportation system. The Transportation
Planning Boa rd' s
Transportation Vision
for
the
2Js
Century,
adopted
in 1998
,
emphasizes bicycles and pedestrians
in
its
goals, objectives and strategies. A
key
patt
of
the
Vi
sion
is
a strong urban core
and a
se
t of regional activity centers,
wh ich
wi
ll provide
fo
r mixed uses
in
a
walkable environment and reduced
reliance on the automobi e. The
Vision
also ca lls for the implementation of a
regional bicycle and pedestrian plan.
Recommendations
in
thi s plan will help
rea lize the Vis
ion.
i ycling and Walking in the National
Capital Region
The Washington region is nationally known
for
the qua
li
ty,
beauty, and extent of its bicycle paths. Its walkable core
nei ghborhoods attract residents an d visitors alike The region
has a stronf foundation of walking and bicycling facilities to
build
up
o
n
The Urban Core has a
Growing Network ofBicycle
Lanes
Taken together, bicycling a
nd
walking is a significant
mod
e of transpottation in the Washington
Walking nd
Bic
ycl
ing
accountfor 8.3
ofall trips in the
region. Accord
in
g to the Metropolitan Washington Council of
Governments' 1999 Household Travel Survey there are roughly 1.1
million pedestrian trips
pe
r day
in
the reg ion , which is 7.8 of all trips.
There are roug
hl
y 76,000 bicycle trips per day
in
the region, which is
one-half of one percent
of
the almost
14
million daily trips for all modes
of transportation.
region
Recent years have seen progress for bicyclists and pedestria
ns
Several
maj or new trai ls have opened, and most local governments have adopted
bicycle, pedestrian, and/or trail plans. Th e Washington Metropolitan Area Transi t Authority has
1
DC
Bi
cyc le Lane Photo:
OGfr
PB / Michael Farre
ll
i 1
-
8/18/2019 Bicycle Planning for the National Capital Region
15/182
-
8/18/2019 Bicycle Planning for the National Capital Region
16/182
icycle and Pedestrian Plan
IN
TRO
U
TION
for e National Capital Region
Plan Development and Organization
This plan has been prepared by the National Capital Regi on Transportation Planning Board, the
federally designated Metropo litan Planning Organization MPO) for the Wa s
hin
gton region. Th e
TPB is made up o representatives o 20 local governments, the departments o transpo11ation o
Maryland, Virginia, and the District
o
Columbia, the state legislatures, and the Washington
Metropolitan Area Transit Authority WMATA). Member jurisdictions are shown in Figure i 1
on page i-4. The area
o
the TPB members plus Calvert County in Maryland and Stafford
County in Virginia comprises the Washington, DC-MD-V A Metropolitan Statistical Area
MSA).
Thi s document presents the long-range Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan for the Washington Region
th
rough the year 2030. The plan
is
a list o regional projects identified by the TPB member
jurisdictions, accompanied by recommended best practices and a description
o
existing facilities
and regional trends for bicycling and walking. This plan includes both funded and unfunded
projects. It does not spec
ify
design guidel
in
es, but refers
in
stead to state
and
national guidel
in
es
for bicycle and pedestrian facilities.
This update
o
the
Bicycle and Pedestrian
Plan for the National Capital Region seeks to
reflect the goals, objectives and strategies o
the 1998
TPB Vision
whi le bui lding on
information from previous bicycle plans.
This update also fully incorporates pedestrian
issues
for
the first ti m
e.
Pedestrian planning
is
most needed at the county , city an d
neighborhood level. There is , however, a role
for regional pedest
ri
an planning.
By
recommend ing policies and keeping track o
regional trends, we can help make the
Washing
ton
area a better place to walk.
7
7
New York Avenue Metro Station Photo: DDOT/Jim Sebastian
i 3
The New York venue
Metro Station
Incorporates a Shared-
Use Path nd Bicycle
Parking
-
8/18/2019 Bicycle Planning for the National Capital Region
17/182
Bicycle a
nd
Pedestrian Plan INTRODUCTION
for the Nationa l
apita
l Region
Figure
i-1
TPB
Planning
Area, Washington DC-MD-VA Metropolitan
Statistical
Area MSA)
...
D
TPR P l ~ n u i n . .I'M
10
i l ~ •
p o l i t 1 n SWistir al •O.n a
i-4
-
8/18/2019 Bicycle Planning for the National Capital Region
18/182
Chapter
Planning ontext
-
8/18/2019 Bicycle Planning for the National Capital Region
19/182
Bicycle
and
Pedestrian Plan
CH PTER
1:
for the National Capital Region PLANNING CONTEXT
Overview
This Bicycle nd Pedestrian Plan
for
the National Capital Region draws on and has been shaped
by a number
of
regional, state, and local policy statements, plans, and studies, including the
Vision of the Transpottation Planning Boa rd , the TCSP (Transportation and Community and
System Preservation) reports, federal
and
state guidance on provision of bicycle and pedestrian
faci lities, the Constrained Long Range Plan and Transportation Improvement Program, and state
and local
bi
cycle and pedestrian plans.
The
Vision
of
the
Tran
s
port
ation Planning Board
The National Capital Region Transpottation Planning Board
is
the Metropolitan Planning
Organization for the Washington region. It brings key decision-makers together to coordinate
planning and funding for the region s transportation system.
The TPB s official vision statement
fo
r the region, the Transportation Vision for the
Century adopted
in
1998, is meant
to
g
uid
e regional transpOJtation
inv estments into the new century. The Vision is not a plan with a map
or specific
li
sts
of
projects.
t
lays out eight broad goals, with
associated objectives and strategies that will help the region reach its
goals.
The Vision is supportive
of
pedestrians and bicyclists.
It
calls for:
Convenient, safe bicycle and pedestri
an
access
• Walkable regional activity centers and urban core
• Reduced reliance on the
au
tomob
il
e
• Increased walk and bike mode share
The Vision of he
TPB calls
for
more
Wa/king
and Biking
Including bicycle and pedestrian
faci
lities
in
new transportation projects and
improvements
Implementation of a regional bicycle and pedestrian plan
Sections
of
the Vision relating to bicycle and pedestrian goals are highlighted
in
Table 1-l. The
full text of the Vision is available at \ \ \ \ .111\\
co .o1'
/transpo11ation.
This plan is intended to help fu lfill the goals of the TPB Vision for Bicyclists and Pedestrians;
recomm endations
in
thi s plan reflect the goals of the Vision.
In
addition to the spec ific references
in
Table 1-1. many other aspects
of
the Vision address
bicyclists and pedestrians, such as: maintaining the ex isting transpottation system, reducing the
per capita vehicle miles traveled, linking land use and transpottation planning, and achieving
enhanced funding for transpotiation priorities.
1 1
-
8/18/2019 Bicycle Planning for the National Capital Region
20/182
Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan
CHAPTER :
for the National Capital Region PLANNING CONTEXT
Table 1-1:
Bicycle a
nd
Pedestrian Provisions
of
the Transportation Vision
Goal 1 The Washington metropolitan region s transp011ation system will provide
reasonable access at reasonable cost to evervone
in
the region.
Objective
4:
Convenient bicycle and pedestrian access.
Strategy
3:
Make the region s transportation faci
liti
es safer, more access
ibl
e and less
intimidating for pedestrians bicyclists
an
d
pe
rsons with special needs.
Goal
2.
The Washington metropolitan region will develop. implement. and
maintain
an
interconnected transpor
ta
tion svstem that enhances qua l
ity
of life and
promotes a strong and grow ing econo
my
through the entire region. inc ludi ng a hea lthy
regional core and dynam ic region activity center with a mix
of
jobs. housing. and services
in a
wa
lkable en
vironme
nt _
Objective
2: Eco
nomically strong regio
nal
activity centers with a
mi
x of jo
bs
, housing,
se
rvices, and recreation in a walkable environment.
Objecti
ve 4:
Improved internal mobility with reduced reliance on the automobile
with
in
the regiona l core and within regional activity centers.
Goal 5.
Th
e Washington metropolitan region will plan a
nd
develop a
trans
pot1ati
on system that enh ances and protects the regio
n
s natural environmental
qualit
y.
cultura l and
hi
storic resources. and communities.
Objective 3: Increased transit, ridesharing, bicycling and wa lking mode shares.
Strategy
7:
Implement a
re
gional bicycle/trail/ pedestrian plan a
nd
include
bi
cycle
and pedestrian facilities in
new trans
pm1ation
projects a
nd
improvements.
Accompanying
th
e ision
is
a shorter act
ion
agenda with elements
to
be included
in
the
year 2000 long range transportation plan
fo
r the region. Item four on the action agenda
cal ls for a regional conges
tion
management system
to achi
eve significant reduction
in
s
in
gle
oc
cupant vehicles (SOVs) entering the regional core and regi
ona
l activity centers
by:
• desig
nin
g a
nd
developing c
ir
cula
ti
on systems that maximize the use of transit
(rai
l,
monorail , bus, jitney. etc.)
and
pedestrian and bicycle facilities
1 2
-
8/18/2019 Bicycle Planning for the National Capital Region
21/182
Bicycle an d Pedestrian Plan CHAPTER 1:
for the National Capital Region PLANNING CONTEXT
Encouraging Bicycling an d Walking:
Bike to
Work
Day, the Bike to
Work
Guide, and
Guaran
t
ee
d Ride Home
To help rea lize the
TPB Vision
and reduce congestion, air pollution, and single occupant vehicle
traffic, the TPB has developed several programs to encourage bicycling and walking in the
Washington region. s part of its Commuter Connections program, every year on the third
Fr iday in May the TPB sponsors a regional Bike to Work Day. This event has grown into one of
the largest of its kind in the country, attracting over six thousand riders to more than twenty pit
stops or rallying points around the region. The event is meant to encourage first-time riders to
try bicycling to work.
The Commuter Connections program also supports publication of
Biking
t
Work in the
Washington Area: A Gu
id
e
for
Employers
and
A Guide
for
Employees
which provides tips for
employees and emp
lo
yers. Fo r employees, there are tips on safe cycling, laws, equipment and
clothing, and transit connections. For employers, the guide explains the benefits
of
bicycling to
the employer, the types of bicycle parking, and the ways an employer can encourage an
employee to bike to work. Commuter Connections also makes available on-line a regional map
of ex isting bicycle faci lities, park and ride lots with bicycle parking, transit, and HOY lanes.
1
The
Bicycle and Pedestrian Subcommittee a lso pub lishes a map
of
regional bicycle fac ilities in
cooperation wit h the ADC Map Company . Maps can be ordered at lww.adcmap.com .
People sometimes drive to work because they need to be able to get home quickly in an
emergency. To meet that need and help get more people out
of
their cars, the Commuter
Connections program offers a free taxi ride home in an emergency for commuters who regularly
(twice a week) carpool, vanpool, bike, wa lk or take transit to work. Commuters
who
sign up for
the Guaranteed Ride Home program may use it up to four times per year.
Pr
iorities 2000: Metropo litan Washington Greenways and Circulation Systems
The Greenways
and Circulation
Systems Reports
identifY specific
projects that
support the TPB
Vision
supports the goal
In 1999 the TPB undertook the preparation of two reports :
Priorities
2000: Metropolitan Washington Greenways
and
Priorities 2000:
Metropolitan Washington Circulation
ystemi
.
The reports were
funded by the Federal Highway Administration under the
Transportation and Community and System Preservation (TCSP) Pilot
Program. The grant was intended to support two key components of the
TPB vision: improving circulation within the regional core and regional
activity centers, and integrating greenspace into a regional greenways
system.
The Greenways Report
supports the greenways and trails
component
of
the TPB vision, wh ile the
Circulation Systems Report
of improving circulation, especially non-motorized circulation, within the
1
Th
e Bike to Work Guide is available at www.mwcog.org/commuter/ccindex.hrml
2
Both reports can be downloaded under Information and Pub lications at www.mwcog.on.
l-3
-
8/18/2019 Bicycle Planning for the National Capital Region
22/182
Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan CHAPTER 1:
for the National Capital Region
PLANNING CONTEXT
urban core and the regional activity centers. The two Priorities 2000 reports provided key input
to this bicycle and pedestrian plan.
The Greenways Report identified eight regional priority trail projects,
and
twelve local projects,
as well as nine major existing greenways.
Projects were selected as regional
priorities based on five criteria:
• Potential inter-j urisd ictional
connection
• Fill a critical
gap
• Provide ecological benefits
•
Links
to existing or planned
greenway
• Provide community access to the
regional greenway network
The
Greenways Report
also provides
detailed strategies for identifying,
planning, implementing, and managing
greenways projects.
3
C O Canal Towpath
Great Falls, MD
Regional priority projects, local priority projects, and selected ex1stmg greenways from the
Greenways Report
are
shovm in Appendix M. Several of these green
ways
have been completed
since this report was published, while others have been advanced significantly.
Priorities 2000: Circulation Systems
The Circulation Systems Report focused
on
local circulation systems within the regional core
and within regional activity centers. Places such as Tyson' s Corner have grown to urban
densities whi le relying almost entirely
on
the automobile for internal mobility, leading to
worsening congestion. There
is
tremendous interest in improving internal pedestrian, bicycle,
and
transit mobility in such centers.
The Circulation Systems Report identified candidate and priority projects for improving internal
circulation. Out of 5 candidate projects identified, 4 were pedestrian or bicyc le projects.
Projects were selected as regional priorities using the following criteria:
• location in a regional activity center
• readiness for implementation
• included in a local plan
3
C O Towpath Photo: COG/TPB, Michael Farrell
-
8/18/2019 Bicycle Planning for the National Capital Region
23/182
Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan
CHAPTER :
for the National Capital Region PL NNING CONTEXT
•
safety
•
air
quality
•
economic development
•
households served
•
employees served
•
cost
The following projects were selected as regional priorities:
1
Downtown
DC
Circulator
2. New York Avenue Metro Station Access
3. Union Station Bike Station
4. Montgomery County
CBD
Shuttle Package
5. Rockville Town Center
6. Suitland Metro
Area
Bus and Pedestrian Improvements
7. Old Town Fairfax Redevelopment
8. Rosslyn Circle Crossing
9. Tyson 's Corner Pedestrian Improvements
Of
the nine regional priority circu lation projects, seven are wholly
or
partially pedestrian
or
bicycle projects.
The Greenways and Circulation Systems Reports continue to serve as a resource for planners in
the Washington region. They also represent the most recent statement of regional bicycle and
pedestrian priorities, and a majority of the projects chosen as priorities have either been
implemented or have been advanced significantly since the TCSP reports were issued. The
TCSP selection criteria for regional priority have been incorporated into the information in the
regional bicycle and pedestrian database.
Federal and State Policies
Virginia now
requires routine
accommodation
of
pedestrians
nd
bicyclists in
transportation
projects
4
www virginiadol org
U.S. Department of Transportation guidance issued
in
2000 calls for
bicycling and walking facil
iti
es to be incorporated into all transportation
projects unless exceptional circumstances exist. In 2004, the Virginia
Department of Transportation released its policy for bicycle and
pedestrian accommodation, which commits VDOT to routinely
accommodating pedestrians and bicyclists as part of all new construction
and reconstruction projects, unless exceptional circumstances exist.
4
The
State of Maryland s Bicycle and Pede
st
rian Access Act provides that
Access to and use of transportation facilities by pedestrians and bicycle
riders shall be conside
re
in all phases of transportation planning,
1 5
-
8/18/2019 Bicycle Planning for the National Capital Region
24/182
Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan
CH PTER :
for the National Capital Region PL NNING CONTEXT
including highway design. construction. reconstruction. and repair. '
5
The
Maryland Department
of
Transportation is to ··work to ensure ' that transportation options for pedest
ri
ans
and
bicycle
riders ill be enhanced and not negatively impacted by a project
or
improvement.
Routine accommodation policies are sometimes known as ·'complete streets'' policies.
6
·'Complete streets are defined as streets that are designed and operated to enab le safe access for
all users, including motorists, pedestrians, bicyclists, and transit users, as well as senior citizens,
chi ldren, and
per
so ns with disabilities. Oregon, Virginia, South Carolina, and a number
of
other
reg ions and cities have adopted such policies.
Federal and State policies have
evo
lved, from not requiring (or in some cases prohibiting) the use
of transportation funds for pedestrian or bicycle facilities, towards requiring the provision of
such facilities. These new federal and state guidel ines and policies wil l likely lead to
an
increase
in
the
number of
pedestrian and bicycle facilities provided, with more facilities provided as part
of
larger transportation projects rather than as stand-alone projects.
Americans with Di
sa
bilities
Act
The
Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) is a federal civil rights statute that prohibits
discrimination against people who
have
disabilities. Under the ADA, designing and constructing
facilities that are not usable by people with disabilities constitutes
discrimination. Public rights of
way,
including pedestrian facilities. are
required by federal law to be accessible to people with disabilities.
Both new and altered pedestrian facilities must be made accessible to
perso ns with i sab ilities, including those who are blind
or
visually
impaired .
The
courts have held that
if
a
st
reet is to be altered to make it
more usable by the genera l public, it must also be made more usable for
those with disabilities.
The ADA Requires
that all New
and
Altered Pedestrian
Facilities be made
Accessible to the
Handicapped
Government facilities which were
in
existence prior to the effective dates
of
the ADA and which
have not been altered are not required to be
in
full compl iance with facility standards developed
for
new
construction and alterations. However, th
ey
must achieve 'program access.' That is, the
program must, when viewed in its entirety, not deny people with disabilities access to
government programs and serv ices. For example, curb ramps may not be required
at
every
existing walkway
if
a basic level of access to the pedestrian network can be achieved by
other
means, e.g., the use of a slightly longer route. Municipalities should develop plans for the
5
Maryland Department of Transportation, enty Year Bicyc le and Pedestrian Access
la
ster Plan October, 2002.
p.
32.
6
\ \ \ w.completestn:l'h.org
1 6
-
8/18/2019 Bicycle Planning for the National Capital Region
25/182
Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan CHAP
TE
R :
for the Nationa l Capital Region PLANN
ING
CON
TEXT
installation
of
curb ramps and accessible signals such that pedestrian routes are, when viewed
in
their
e n t i r e t ~
accessible to people who are blind
or
visually impaired within reasonable travel
time limits.
Design standards for the disabled, such as smoother surfaces, adequate width, and limits on
cross-slope, are also beneficial for the non-disabled pedestrian. Good design for persons with
disabilities is good design for a
I.
SAFETEA
LU
Under the SAFETEA-LU (Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act:
Legacy for Users) federal transportation bill signed in August 2005, bicycle and pedestrian
projects remain broadly eligible for nearly all funding categories, either for projects incorporated
into something larger, or for stand-alone bicycle and pedestrian projects. The bill authorizes
286 billion for highways and transit from 2005 through 2009, a
22
increase over the previous
federal transportation bill, TEA-21.
Transportation Enhancements, half
of
which historically have been spent on bicycle or
pedestrian projects, are funded nationally at a level of 3.25 billion over five years. The
Recreational Trails Program sets aside 110 million for non-motorized trails. SAFETEA-LU
also contains a number
of
high priority projects, sometimes known as legislative earmarks, many
of which are bicycle or pedestrian projects.
8
Pedestrian and bicycle projects are not
however,
limited to set-aside programs and high priority projects. They are broadly eligible for funding
from highway and transi t funds.
Safe Routes to Sch
oo
l
Aside from the general increase
in
funding under SAFETEA-LU, the most important new set
aside for bicyclists and pedestrians is the Safe Routes to School (SRTS) Program. The goals of
the program are to enable and encourage children to walk and bike to school , improve safety, and
reduce traffic and air pollution near schools. Eligible activities include both infrastructure and
non-infrastructure projects. Infrastructure projects include bicycle parking, crosswalks,
sidewalks, traffic calming, on and off-street bicycle facilities, etc. on any public road or trail
in
the vicinity
of
a school. Non-infrastructure projects include public awareness and outreach to
encourage walking and bicycling to school, traffic education and enforcement
near
schools,
student sessions, training, SRTS program managers, and a State Coordinator.
Not
less than 10
or
more than 30 of SRTS funds must be s
et
aside for non-infrastructure projects.
7
Am
erican Council for the Blind, Ped
es
trian S fety Handbook: A Handbook
for
Adv
oc
ates. www.acb.org
8
See www.bikeleague.org for further information
on
the Bicycle and Pedestrian provisions
of
SAFETE
A-L
U.
7
-
8/18/2019 Bicycle Planning for the National Capital Region
26/182
Bicy
cl
e and Pedestrian Plan C
HAP
TER 1:
for
the
National Capital Region
PLANNING CONTEXT
Funds will be administered by State Departments
of
Transportation, with I
00%
federal share
no l
oca
l match required. Each state is to receive funds in proporti
on
to K-8 school enrollment,
but not less than 1 million. The
budget
will grow from
54
million in 2005 to 183 million in
2009.
Cons
tr
ained Long-Range Plan
The
financially Constrained Long-Range Transportation Plan (CLRP) is a comprehensive plan
of
transportation projects and strategies that the TPB rea listically anticipates can be implemented
over the next 25 years.
The
region's transportati on agencies and jurisdictions submit projects for
the CLRP, which is developed and approved by the TPB.
The CLRP
is the primary vehicle for
rea lizing the B Vision and the States' long-range plans. Federal law requires that the CLRP be
updated every four years; the most recent version was adopted in 2004. To receive federal
fu nding, a transportation project in metropolitan Washington must be included in the CLRP.
Because funds must be reasonably anticipated to be available for al l the projects in the CLRP,
the
CLRP
is realist ic plan based upon available reso urces.
The CLRP identifies a few important bicycle projects, as well as di scussi ng the actions of the
Bicycle and Pedestrian Subcommittee to promote pedestrian and bicycle safety, walkable
communities, and better professional development and training. Training in the requirements of
the Americans with Disabilities Act with res pect to pedestrian facilities has been a major
emphasis.
Bicycle and pedestrian projects in the 2005 CLRP are listed in Appendix C. Historically, less
than 1%
of
the capital fund ing in the
CLRP
has been specifically for stand-alone bicycle and
pedestrian projects. However, since bicycle and pedestrian projects are usually small projects,
they are often added to the plan later than the major highway and trans
it
projects. Moreover,
much pedestrian and bicycle spending is subsumed within larger highway or transit projects, and
thus is not reflected in the amount programmed for bicycle and pedestrian projects. The re fore,
the
CLRP
may under-estimate
the
amount
of
bicycle and pedestrian spendin g that wi
ll occur
over the nex t 25 yea rs. State Departments o f Transportation may a I o in crease funding levels in
the future as they impl
eme
nt pol icies to routinely accommodate pedestrians and bicyclists in all
n
ew
transportation proj ects.
Under SAFETEA-LU bicyclists, pedestrians, and people w ith
di
sa
bi lities are explicitly r
eq
uired to be g
iv
en an opportunity to
comment on metropo litan transp01tation plans.
Tran
sportat
ion Improvem
ent Pr
ogram
The
Transp01tat ion
Im
provement Program (TIP) provides detailed
information showing which projects in the CLRP will be completed
over the next six-year period. The TlP is updated every yea r. Like
1·8
he Transportation
Improvement
Program includes
122 millionfor
pedestrian nd
bicycle projects
-
8/18/2019 Bicycle Planning for the National Capital Region
27/182
Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan CH PTER :
fo r
th
e National Capital Region
PL NNING
CONTEXT
the CLRP, the TIP is subject to federa l review. Many projects in the TTP are staged, so a single
CLRP project could end being split into multiple TIP projects.
Bicycle and pedestrian projects that use federa l funds are listed in the T IP. Fo r example, the
Fiscal Year 2006-201 1 TlP includes 1
22
million
fo
r bicycle and pedestrian projects. f that,
69 million is programmed for FY 2006, which is 2.4
of
the total capita l fu nds fo r all
transportation projects programm ed fo r FY 2006. As with the
CL
RP , fu nds spe
nt
on bicycle and
pedestrian accomm odations as patt
of
a larger
hi
ghway or transi t project are
of
ten sub sum ed in
budget
of
the larger project.
Loca l Bicyc le and Pedestria n lanning
Nearly every jurisdiction in the region has completed a bicycle or pedestrian plan, and most have
at least part time bicycle or pedestrian planner. Table 1
2
shows local and state plans and studies
and the year published. Jurisdictio
ns
and agencies drew projects
fr
om these individual plans and
submitted them for incorporation into the Regional
Bic
ycle and Pedestrian Plan. Local plans
may include unfunded projects.
1 9
-
8/18/2019 Bicycle Planning for the National Capital Region
28/182
Bicycle and Pedes
trian
Plan CH PTER I :
fo r the National Capital Region PLANNING CONTEXT
Ta
ble 1-2:
Major Bicycle
and
Pedestr ian Plans and Studies
Of the Washington Region
Jurisdiction/ Plan/Study Year
Agency
Arlington Pedestrian Transportation 1997
County
Plan ,
1
994
Bicycle Tran sp01ta tion Plan
City of Bicycle Transportation and 19
98
Alexandria Multi-Use T
rail
Plan
Di
strict
of
District
of
Columbia Bicycle 2005
Columbia Master Plan
Fairfax Countywide Trails Plan
2002
County
Frederick County Frederick C
ou
nty Bikeways
1999
and
Trails
Plan
City of Bikeways and Pedestrian Plan
1999
Gaithersburg
Lo
ud
o
un
Co
un
ty Loudoun Co unty Bicycle and
2003
Pedest
ri
an Master
Pl
an
Maryland Twenty Year Bicycle and
2
00
2
Depa1tment of Pedestrian Access Master Pl an
Transportation
MNC
PPC -
Transportation Prior
ity Li
st
1
999
Prince George s County (Joint Signature Letter)
Montgomery
Coun
tyw
ide Bikeways 20
05
County Functio
nal
Ma ster Plan
National Capital Comprehensi ve
Pl
an
fo
r the
2004
Planning National Capital
Commission
National Cap
it
al Region Pri orities
2
000: Metropolitan
200
1,
Tran sport
at
ion Planning Washington Greenways
1995
B
oa
rd Cir
cu
lation Systems,
Bicycle Plan for the Na tional
Cap ital Region
National Park
Paved R
ec
reation Tra
il
s Plan 1
990
Se
rvice
1 10
-
8/18/2019 Bicycle Planning for the National Capital Region
29/182
Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan CHAPTER :
for the National
Capita
l Region PLANNING
CONTEXT
J urisdiction/ Plan/St
ud
y Year
Agency
Prince William Thoroughfares Plan part of 1998, 1993
County
Comprehensive Plan),
Greenways and Trails Plan
City of
Bicycle Master Plan 1998
Rockville
Virginia Department of
Northern Virginia Regional
2003
Transportation , Bikeway and Trail
Ne
tw
or
k
Northern Virginia Study
Office
Table 1-3 shows the approximate number of
fu
ll-time planners each agency has working on
bicycle, pedestrian, and trails planning.
Jurisdiction/
Agency
Arl in gton
County
City of
Gaithersburg
City of
Alexandria
City of Co ll
ege
Park
City of
Rockville
District of
Columbia
Fairfax
County
Table 1-3:
Agency Bicycle/Pedestrian Pl
anning Staff
Full-Time Equivalents
(FTE's
)
Bicycle Planner Pedestrian Planner Tra ils Planner
FTE's FTE's FTE's
1
I
1
0.5
0.5 0.5
0.5
0.5 0.5
2 1
2
2
1 11
-
8/18/2019 Bicycle Planning for the National Capital Region
30/182
Bicycle
and
Pedestrian Plan
CHAPTER
1:
for
the
National Capital Region
PLANNING CONTEXT
Jurisdiction/
Bicycle Planner Pedestrian
Planner
Trails Pl
anner
Agency
FTE s
FTE s FTE s
Frederick County 0 5
Loudoun County
0 5
Maryland 1
2
1
Department
of
Transportation
MNCPPC-
0 33
0 33 I
Montgomery County
MNCPPC-
I
Prince George s
County
Montgomery
County
National Capital 0 5
0 5
Region
Transpottation
Plann in g Board
National Park
l
Service
Prince William
0 5
County
Virginia Depatiment
1 5 1 5
of
Transportation,
Northern Virginia
Office
\VMATA 0 5
0 5
Priority Unfunded Regiona l Bicycle and Pedestrian Projects
The Bicycle and Pedestrian Subcommittee periodically selects a short list
of
priority unfunded
bicycle and pedestrian projects. These projects are selected from the TCSP reports, the regional
1 12
-
8/18/2019 Bicycle Planning for the National Capital Region
31/182
Bicycle and Pedes tr ian Plan CHAPT R 1:
for the Na tional Capital Region PLANNING CONTE
XT
bicycle plan, and
from
state a
nd
local plans.
Th
e subcommittee has compiled
an
d forwarded lists
to TPB regularly s
in
ce 1995, to
be
included
in th
e so
li
citation document for the TIP/CL
RP.
In
essence, the TPB urges the jurisdictions to consider funding these projects, which the Bicycle
and Pedest
ri
an Subcommittee has judged to
be
reg ionally significant, within six years.
The selec
ti
on criteria for inclusion
in
this short
li
st were drawn
fi·
om those used in the TCSP
Greenways and Circulation Systems Reports
The following criter
ia
were use
d:
• Bi
cy
cle Network Connectivity: priority
was
given to projects that enhanced connectivity of
faci I
ti
es on the
re
gional bicycle faci lities network.
•
Pe
destrian Sa
fe
ty: priority was given to projects that promoted pedestrian safety, especially
in areas with documented pedestrian safety problems and no pending road project that could
address
th
e
m.
• Access to
Tr
ans
it
: priority was given to projects that enhanced access
to
Metrorail stations
and other maj or transit stops or facilities.
• Time Frame: all projects should be able to be completed by 20 I l , the end
of
the
TI
P time
frame.
• Local S
upp
o
rt
: the project
is
a priority for the jurisdiction or
jur
isdic
ti
ons
in
which it is
located.
• Still seeking funding: the project does not yet have fu ll
co
nstruction funding committed to
it.
• Reasonable Cost: the total cost of
th
e list shou ld be a reasonable fraction of the total
spending in the region on highways and bridges.
While considerable weight
is
given
to
the preference
of th
e representative
of
the jurisdiction,
subcommittee members are urged to think
in
terms
of
the regio
nal
selection criteria when
no
min
a
tin
g projects.
Projects are dropped
from
the list when they receive fundin
g
or if the subcommittee and
no
min
at ing jurisdict
ion
decide that priorities have changed. Most projects on past lists have
been funded. Seven projects totaling 11,508,000 were funded
from
the 2000 list, and fiv e
projects from
th
e 2002
li
st were fully or partia
lly
funded. Projects funded since 1995 include:
>
The Metropolitan Branch Trail in Washington, D
.C.
>
Pedestri
an
a
nd
Bicycle Safety Improvements on Route I in
Fa
irfax County
>
Th
e Dumf
ri
es Road (Route 234)
Bi
ke Path
in
Prince W
ill
iam
County
>
The Rosslyn Circle Crossing
in
Arl ington County
;.... The Eisenhower Trail
in
Alexandria
;>
The Matthew Henson Trail in Montgomery County
;.... The Henson Creek Trail
in
Prince George's County
;> The Millennium Trail
in
the Rockv ille
1-13
-
8/18/2019 Bicycle Planning for the National Capital Region
32/182
Bicycle
and
Pedestrian Plan
CHAPTER 1:
for
the National Capital Region
PLANNING CONTEXT
Regional Bicycle Plans
The Washington region completed
its
first major bicycle study, the
Washington Regional
Bikeways Study
in
1977. This study, created under the supervision
of
the Regional Bikeways
Technical Subcommittee
of
the Transportation Planning Board Technical Committee, provided
an
overview
of
bicycling characteristics a
nd
the potential market for bicycle commuting.
In
1988
the Bicycle Technical Subcommittee began work on a bicycle element for incorporation
into the region's
transp01tation plan. The plan identified the extent to which bicycle facilities
and planning processes already existed in th region high lighted areas of concern
fo
r the future,
and drafted a
se
t
of
policy principles to
be
applied by the region's jurisdictions in updating their
own transportation plans, as well as a list of recommended bicycle projects. The
Bicycle
Element
was adopted
by
the Transportation Planni
ng
Board as part
of
the reg
ion
s
Constrained
Long-Range
Pl
an
in
November
199
1.
In
I995, the Transportation Planning Board adopted an update
to
the
1991
Bicycle Element
the
Bicycle Plan
fo
r the National Capital Region, as an amendment to the Constrained Long-Range
Plan. The revised pl
an
emphasized bicycling
for
transportation and rec
om
mended project lists
and
po
l
icy
principles produced by the Bicycle Technical Subcommittee.
In February 200I, the TPB completed the
Priorities 2000: Greenways
and
Circulation Systems
reports, which identified greenway and pedestrian circulation systems
pri
or
iti
es.
Except for the
Priorities 2000
reports, predecessors to this plan we re bicycle plans. This
upd ate to the previous plans
fu
lly incorporates pedestrian elements for the first time.
So
urc
es
of
tbe Regional P lan Projects
State, local, and agency bicycle and pedestrian plans are the source
of
the projects
in
this plan.
All bicycle and pedestrian projects that are pr
og
ramm
ed in
the TIP are also
in
the CLRP and
in
this plan. The plan, however, includes many projects that are not
in
the TIP or the CLRP. The
selecti
on
criteria from the Transportation Planning B
oa rd
s Priorities 2000: G;rcu/ations
Systems
and
Greenways
reports helped determine the data included for each project
in
the
bicycle and pedestrian plan project list. Figure 1-1
ill
ustrates the relationships between the
various project lists.
1 14
-
8/18/2019 Bicycle Planning for the National Capital Region
33/182
Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan
CHAPTER 1:
r the National Capital Region
PLANNING CONTEXT
Figure 1 1
Regional Prior ity Bicycle and Pedestrian
riorities
Unfunded Bicycle
l
Projects in State Local
and Pedestrian
'
-
8/18/2019 Bicycle Planning for the National Capital Region
34/182
Chapter
icycling and Walking in the Washington Region
-
8/18/2019 Bicycle Planning for the National Capital Region
35/182
Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan
for the National Capital Region
CHAPTER : BICYCLING
ND
WALKING IN
THE
WASHINGTON
REGION
Overview
Re
s
id
ents of the Washington region wa
lk
and bicycle at about the same rate as the nation as
a whole. Tables 2-l and 2-2 show the share
of
walking and bicycling trips to work for the ten
largest metropolitan areas.
Nationally}
10
of
all
urban area
trips are made
onfootor y
bike
Walking and bicycling are decl ining
as modes of ransportation
both
in the
Washington region and nationally.
Nationa
ll
y
0.38%
of
American
workers bicycled to work in 2000,
and 2.93% walked. n 1990 0.4%
bicycled to work, and 3.9 walked.
The number of people driving alone
rose
from 73.2% in 1990 to 75.7% in
2000,
while use of public transpottation fell
by
0.5%. Driving has been grow
in
g,
and
walking and
public transportation declining, for many decades.
In
1960, 9.9% of
wo
rkers walked
to
work, but
on
ly 2.93%
did so
in 2000.
2
The walk and bike modes are more conunon,
though, than the census commute mode numbers
would lead one to believe. Work trips account for
only 20% of all trips; walking and biking are more
common for other purposes. National
ly
9.5% of
all urban area trips were made on foot,
and 0.9%
by bicycle in
2001. In
the Mid-Atlantic region,
15.8%
of all trips are made
on
foot, and
0.8% by
bicycle.
3
Regionally, bicycling and walki
ng
are
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Table 2
1
Walk
Pedestrian Commuting in
to
the Ten Largest
Metropolitan Areas
Work
New York 5.55
Boston 4.12
Philadelph ia
3.88
San Francisco 3.25
Chicago 3.13
Washington
3.10
Los Angeles
2.56
Detroit
1.83
Houston
1.62
Dallas-Fort Worth
1.48
United States
2.93
Table 2-2: %
Bicycle Commuting in the Bike to
Ten Largest Metropolitan
Work
Areas
San Francisco 1.12
Los Angeles
0.63
Boston
0.38
Philadelphia
0.33
Chicago
0.31
Houston
0.30
New York
0.30
Washington
0.30
Detroit
0.18
Dallas--Fort Worth
0.14
United States 0.38
concentrated in the core neighborhoods
of
the Washington region, espec ially areas near
downtown D.C. and certain Metro stations, as well as college campuses and military bases.
Figures on walking remain stab le
in
t
ho
se
neighborhoods,
whi
le bicyc
ling
numbers are
growin
g.
I 2000 US Census
2 1960 Census
of
Population, Characteristics
of
Popu lation, United States Summary
3 Pucher, John, Socioeconomics
of
Urban Travel: Evidence from the 200 I NI-ITS .
Transportation Quarterly,
Vo l. 57, No.3, Summer 2003 (49-77). Page 54.
2
1
-
8/18/2019 Bicycle Planning for the National Capital Region
36/182
Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan
for the National Capital Region
C
HAPTER
2: BICYCLING AND
WALKING IN
TH
WASHINGTON R
EGION
Ethnicity,
geog
raphy, age, and
car owner
ship affect
the
decision to walk
or
bicycle to work.
People living
in
the District
of
Columbia are fa r more likely to wa lk
or
bicycle to work than
those living
in
Maryland or Virginia. People under the age
of
35 or
over
the age
of
65 are
more
likely to
wa
lk or bicycle to work. People living in households without cars
are
more
likely to walk
or
bicycle than those that have one, and those living in households with on ly
one car are more likely to walk or bicycle than those owning two. Middle-income groups are
sl ightly less likely to wa lk
or
bicycle than either low-income
or
the high-income groups.
Hispanics are most likely to wa lk or bike to wo rk.
Distance is a major barrier to commuter eye ng, along with absence
of
safe routes, and lack
of
end-of-trip facilities such as showers and lockers.
4
However, most commute trips that are
short enough to
be
bikable or
wa
lkable are still taken by car. The average trip distance to
transit or carpool is very short.
Transit and walking are interdependent, with 80 of bus and
60
ofMetrorail access trips
on foot. Mode of access varies tremendous ly by Metro station. Bicycling to transit is less
common
and varies greatly by Metro station, with the lowest rates of bicyc
le
access found
east
ofthc
Anacostia river.
Walking and bicycling are most common in activity centers with a mix of obs, housing,
services, and recreation in a walkable environment.
Juri
sdictional
Tre
nds according to the US Census
The nat iona l trend towards less walk ing and bicycling also ho ld s for the Washington
Metropolitan Statistical Area. n 1990, 6,633 people (0.3 ) biked to work on an average
day
in the Washingt
on area
and 85,292 (3.9 ) walked. In 2000, 7,532 people (0.3 ) biked
to work and 72 ,700 (3. 1
)
walked.
It
should be noted that the census numbers tend to
undercount pedestrian trips, since a walk trip to transit is counted as a trans it trip, not as a
wa lk trip. Charts 2- 1 and 2-2 bel
ow
show the changes in walking and biking to work by
ju
risdictio
n.
4 Metropolitan
Wa
s
hin
gton
Co
uncil
of
Government
s 200 / Bike to Work ay Surv y- Summa1y of Results
June,
2005. Page 6.
2-2
-
8/18/2019 Bicycle Planning for the National Capital Region
37/182
Bic
yc
le and Pedestrian Plan
for the N ational Capital Region
CH PTER 2 : BICYCLING ND
W LKING IN THE
WASHING
TO
N REGION
Cha
rt
2 1: Percentage of Workers Walking to Work
Staftord
I
Ptince WIII•tm
' - ------ l
Lo
ud
oun
: _ _ j
Falrtax
-----
AJexandlia
i
Arl
ingto
n
-
Plinc George·•
Montgomery
Fredetid
Charlet
CaNert
~
O•a1ctol Columbo
200
4.
00
1000
1200 1
-
8/18/2019 Bicycle Planning for the National Capital Region
38/182
Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan
for the National Capital Region
Mode Share by Census
rac
t
CHAPTER : BICYC
LI
NG
ND
W LKING
IN T
HE
W
SHINGTON
RE
GION
Figure
1
shows the percentage
of
home-based
wo
rk tr
ips by
bicycle for each census tract
within the TPB me
mb
er urisdictions. Figure 2 3 shows the percentage
of
home-based
wo rk
trips by foot.
Fi
gures 2-2 and 2-4 show bicycle
an
d walk work trips respectively for the area
served
by
Metro
rai l.
The maps show that bicycling and walking are concentrated in the
neighborhoods surrounding dow ntown D.C., Capitol H
il
l, and North Arlington. Th e
neighbo
rh
oods closest to downtown show the highest walk mode shares, while those a little
fut1her
out have the highest bike mode shares. Cens
us
tracts abutting major facili ties such as
t
he
W OD, the C O, a
nd
the
Mt.
Vernon Trails t
en
d to show higher levels
of
bicycling.
College campuses and military bases such as University
of
Maryland, F
t.
Meye
rs
, Bo
llin
g
Air Force Base,
th
e National Institute
of
Health, Wa lter Reed, Howard, Georgetown and
Gallaudet all have hi gh walk or bike mode share.
2 4
-
8/18/2019 Bicycle Planning for the National Capital Region
39/182
Bicycle and Pedes
tr i
an Plan
fo
r the National Capital Region
CHAPTER
2: BICYCLING AND
WAL
KING N
THE
WASHINGTON REG
IO
N
Figure 2 1 :
2 Bike Commute
Mode Share
Legend
•
Me
tr
o Stations
I
o - o.12
0 12 -0.43
44 - 1.22
• 1.23 - 2.76
a t e r
2 5
y
ensus Tract
0 25 5
es
1
N
A
15 2
-
8/18/2019 Bicycle Planning for the National Capital Region
40/182
Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan
for
the
National
Cap
ital Region
CH PTER 2: BICYCLING AND
WALKING IN THE
WASHINGTON REGION
Figure 2 2:
2000 Bike Commute Mode Share
y
Census ract
N
A
Mle s
1 2 • 6
8
2 6
-
8/18/2019 Bicycle Planning for the National Capital Region
41/182
Bicycle
and
Pedestrian Plan
for the National
Capital
Region
CHAPTER
2: BICYCLING AND
WALKING N THE
WASIDNGTON REGION
Figure 2 3:
2000 Walk Commute Mode Share
Loudolw
C :>
Legend
0 0
0 5.8°o - 16.4°o
D 16.5°o -
33
.60 o
• 33. 7°o - 2 ~ o
{
• :5 y
Census Tract
<
N
A
ti les
0 2. S 0 IS :?0
2 7
-
8/18/2019 Bicycle Planning for the National Capital Region
42/182
Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan
for the National Capital Region
CH PTER 2: BICYCLING AND
WALKING IN THE
WASHINGTON
REGION
Figure 2-4:
Legend
2000 Walk Commute Mode Share
• Metro Statio \
N
y
Census Tract
A
Mil s
0 I 2 4 6 8
2 8
-
8/18/2019 Bicycle Planning for the National Capital Region
43/182
Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan
CHAPTER
2: BICYCLING AND
WALKING IN
THE
WASHINGTON REGION
for the National Capital Region
Bicycling in theMetro Core
COG/TPB periodically takes a count of vehicular traffic including bicycle traffic but excluding
pedestrian traffic entering downtown D.C. and Arlington as well as traffic crossing the beltway.
Bicycling is
Growing
Rapidly
in
Downtown
D C
and North
rlington
Cordon counts are not done
in
other parts ofthe region. COG/TPB
s
cordon
counts confirm the census data indicating a concentration of bicycling in the
neighborhoods close to downtown D.C. and Arlington.
The counts show that bicycle traffic into the downtown Metro core is
growing rapidly with bicycle traffic into the D.C. section ofthe Metro core
more than doubling from 1986 to 2002. The number of bicyclists entering
the Metro core within the D.istrict ofColumbia has grown steadi
ly
from 474
in 1986 to 1 379
in
2002. The number of cyc
li
sts crossing the Potomac
bridges grew from 3 17
in
1986 to 525 in 2002. Bicycle traffic into the
Arlington section of the Metro core increased from 409 to 645 bicyclists
between 1
999
and 2002 wh
il
e Potomac br
id
ge traffic declined slightly over the same period
indicating that more people are bicycling to destinations probab
ly
employment within Arlington
in
the morning. Chart 2-3 shows the number of bicycles entering the D.C. section of the Metro core
from 1986 to 2002.
Chart 2 3:
Bicycles Entering D.C. Section o the Metro Core
2000
1800
16
14
12
1
8
600
400
200
0
1986 1987 1988 199 1993
1996
1
999
2 2
Bicycle traffic is also counted on the beltway cordon including traffic on shared-use paths but the
a.m. volumes recorded are a fraction of the numbers entering the Metro core. Table 2-4
in
Appendix F shows the bicycle volumes recorded cross ing the beltway in 1995 1998 and 2001.
2-9
-
8/18/2019 Bicycle Planning for the National Capital Region
44/182
Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan
for the National Capital Region
CHAPTER
:
BICYCLING AND
WALKING IN TH
WASHINGTON REGION
Demographic Characteristics
of
Pedestrians and Bicyclists
Et
hnicity, geography, income, age, and car ownership affect the decision to walk or bicycle to work.
The best recent source
of
his demographic information on pedestrian and bicycle commuters in the
Washington region is the 2004 Commuter Connections State o he Commute Survey However, the
State
o
he Commute Survey and the US Census both measure work trips only, and the conclusions
in terms
of
both the prevalence and distribution of walking and bicycling can be quite di fferent fo r
all trips than for work trips. Nationally, the 2001 National Household Personal Transportation
Survey is the best source
of
demographic data on pedestrians and bicyclists for all types
of
trips.
All data in the following tables comes from the 2004 State o he Commute Survey unless otherwise
noted. Walking and bicycling were not
ca
lculated separately in the
State
o
he Commute Survey
for
the subcategories
of et
hnicity, income, age, and state
of
residence due to sample size issues. All
mode
sha
res are for primary commute mode, 3+ days per week. Walk/bike mode share varies by
household income, state
of
residence, number
of
vehicles in the household, ethnicity, and age. Both
the 2001 and the 2004 State o the Commute Surveys show l
ower
mode share for walking and
bicycling than does the 2000 Census, a discrepancy probably explained by differing methodologies.
A Household Income
Chart 2-4 shows walking and bicycling commute mode share by income. Walking and
bicycling to work are somewhat more prevalent among the low-income (less than 30,000
household
in
come per year) than among the very high-income (more than 140,000 per
year). Bicycling and walk
in
g are slightly more common at the top and the bottom of the
income distribution than in the middle. This is roughly consistent with the national data for
all tr
ip
s.
hart
2 4: WalklBike
ommute
Mode Share
by
Annual Household Income
S140,
000
+
I I
120,000 39,999
I
I
I
1
00,000 - 119,999
I
I
80,000 - 99,999
I
60,000-79,999
r
30,000-59,9
99
I I I I
L
es
s than 30,000
0.
00
% 0.50%
1.00o/o
1.50% 2.00%
2.50%
3.00% 3.50%
2
-10
-
8/18/2019 Bicycle Planning for the National Capital Region
45/182
Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan
for the National Capital Region
B Ethnicity
CHAPTER 2: BICYCLING AN
WALKING IN THE
WASHINGTON REGION
Walk/b ike commute mode share differs more by ethnicity than by income. Hispanics have
the highest walk/b ike mode share at 3.8 , African-Americans the lowest at 1.5 .
Chart 2 5: lk/Bike Commute Mode Share y Ethnicity
I I
W1ite
J
I
I
I
t is panic
I
I
I
I
ian
I
I I
A frican Arrerican
I
I I
0.00 0.50 1.00
1.5C
2.00 2.50 3.00 3.50 4.00
Nat
i
ona
l data fo r a
ll
trips, however, show
Af
rican-Americans and Hispanics both
wa
lking
for about 12 of a ll trips, though Afr ican-Americans bicycle less. Whites walk less than
any other ethn ic group, but take 0.9 of th
eir
tri ps by bike, the same
as
Hispanics.
5
C. Age