Getting (master) plan crazy and bicycling

A real problem when you do planning and think in terms of systems, structures, and processes is that you think the answer for everything is more and better plans. I am describing myself of course.

Washcycle links to blogger/transportation issues commenter Froggie and his list of proposed bicycling improvements in the Huntington area of Alexandria, "A Christmas Wish-List for the Huntington bicyclist..."

The reality is that almost every one of his suggestions have regional dimensions, making me realize that "we" (the Washington Area) need a "master plan" for regional bicycling system improvements, just like we have master plan for regional roadway and transit improvements.

Now there already is such a plan, the Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan for the National Capital Region (also see Plan Briefing) produced by the Transportation Planning Board of the Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments, which is the designated metropolitan transportation planning organization for the region.

But without more innovative and ground level planning with broad public participation processes, the kinds of connections as identified in Froggie's post aren't likely to made.

I feel like this is evident in the DC Bicycle Master Plan. More or less, the scope of work for the project was focused on improving the bicycling environment within DC, with public participation processes focused on DC residents, and as a result, I think the plan missed certain issues such as improving bicycle-related connections into and out of the city, either through off-road bicycle trails as well as street entries into the city, whether or not there are on-road bicycle lanes, sharrow markings. or separated cycle tracks.

This is a point I made in the follow on paper (and blog entry), "Ideas for making bicycling irresistible in Washington DC," which was produced for the DC response to the Active Transportation initiative of the Rails-to-Trails Conservancy, and some of the RtTC initiative made it into the Federal fiscal stimulus package.

The paper included points such as these:

• Where demand is indicated through surveys, work with non-DC jurisdictions to enhance the ability to bicycle to and from DC (i.e., Georgia Ave., Wisconsin Ave., Riggs Road, New Hampshire Ave., South Capitol, Rte. 1, etc.). For example, people living and working in the Route 1 corridor in DC and MD are faced with dangerous riding conditions. The preference should be to focus on improving bicycling conditions on arterials and city and county streets, not the creation of separate or circuitous paths. Discuss this systematically with Montgomery and Prince George’s Counties specifically, since DC shares a physical border with these jurisdictions.

•Trail planning and development for recreational purposes is a separate purpose with different needs than every day cycling, and should be treated so.

• Regarding tourism and recreation objectives, consider the creation of bicycling-oriented “scenic byways” through the city with appropriate signage programs.

• Are there stations within the subway network (in DC and outside of DC) that are good locations to add bikestations? (Fund a pilot location within DC with the TEA grant.) (While discussed in the planning stages, a bike station is not being installed in the portion of the Silver Spring Transit center currently being constructed by WMATA and Montgomery County Dept. of Public Works and Transportation!!!!!!!)

But other than promoting the idea of better linkages, as well as coordinated cross-jurisdictional planning, I didn't suggest any specific trail or route additions, unlike Froggie.

The Adventure Cycling Association has created a proposed U.S. Bicycle Route System, comparable in scope to the Interstate Highway System. The plan would stitch together 50,000 miles of bicycle-friendly roads, byways and trails, and would have a common signage system.


A regional bicycle trail and route system in the Washington area should be similarly devised, planned, and marked (signed).

From the paper on making cycling irresistible:

• Enhanced route marking and signage system. (Seattle, Berkeley, San Francisco, London) e.g., why aren’t there map signs along routes (Austin), street markings in addition to signage, and contact information signs, etc. (The map tubes used at Downtown Circulator bus stops are another example of how maps could be installed along bicycle routes.)

• The current signage system could be augmented by including signs pointing to specific facilities and destinations adjacent to the route, including recreation centers, public schools, public libraries, and notable sites. For example, the Newton Street route in Brookland could direct riders to the Turkey Thicket Recreation Center and to public schools, while the route between Brookland and Capitol Hill could include directional signage to the Woodridge branch of the Public Library.

• Modify the blue DC wayfinding signs to better denote transit proximity and at the same time add information about supportive bicycling facilities.

San Francisco Bicycle Route sign by /\/\ichael Patric|{