Fairfax County is building a new trail in Huntington (and also a levee)

Fairfax County is building a new levee in the Huntington neighborhood to reduce flooding, and an added amenity of the project are 4800 feet of new 8-foot wide multi-use trail from the existing trails near Arlington Terrace and Hunting Creek Roads to Fenwick Drive and possibly beyond  A groundbreaking ceremony will be held at 10am today, if you're interested

Most of the way it will have two parallel trails, one on the levee and another in the ponding area. But on the ends they'll meet and connect with existing roads or trails. 

Screenshot 2017-03-23 at 1.05.28 AM

This trail will probably get some use, mostly recreation I suspect, but how much transportation utility it has will depend on what that line trailing off to the west does. It seems to end at the Metro tracks, but if it could continue under them to Metroview Parkway, it could create a decent connection to the Huntington Metro Station. There's room beneath power lines to go all the way to Telegraph Road, where it could could connect to an existing bicycle sidepath to Eisenhower Avenue near the Eisenhower Avenue Metro. And then, if you want to get more ambitious, a trail could continue to follow the power lines from East Drive all the way to the Beltway. Or going totally crazy it could connect to a new bride parallel to the Metro Bridge over Cameron Run and create a more direct connection to the Eisenhower Metro. 

Stormwater management is the primary purpose of this project so some aesthetics are being sacrificed. For example, the levee trail will have a 4' tall concrete-capped I-Wall on the Cameron Run side.

Screenshot 2017-03-23 at 1.12.37 AM

A rendering of the trails gives some idea of what they'll look like.

Screenshot 2017-03-23 at 1.14.47 AM

And another from on the trail, with the I-Wall

Screenshot 2017-03-23 at 1.15.46 AM

Work started in winter of this year and is to finish in Spring 2019, but that might have slipped a little.

Discuss Montgomery County bike projects in Clarksville area at upcoming open houses

From a recent announcement:

Montgomery County Department of Transportation (MCDOT) is holding two, identical open houses for those who would like to learn more and provide input about transportation projects planned for the Clarksburg area. Attend either Tuesday, March 28 or Wednesday, April 19. Both workshops will be held from 7 to 9 p.m. at the Clarksburg High School Cafeteria, 22500 Wims Road, Clarksburg.

MCDOT project managers and staff from the Maryland State Highway Administration and Maryland-National Capital Park and Planning Commission will be available to discuss:

1. Stringtown Road (from Overlook Park Drive to Snowden Farm Parkway)

2. Clarksburg Square Connector (from Frederick Road to Clarksburg Square Road)

3. Frederick Road Bikepath (from Milestone Manor Lane to Stringtown Road))

4. Snowden Farm Parkway at Clarksburg Rd (Intersection improvement)

5. MD 355 and Clarksburg Rd (Intersection improvement)

6. MD 355 - Clarksburg Shared Use Path (from Stringtown Road to Snowden Farm Parkway)

7. Observation Drive (from Waters Discovery Lane to Stringtown Road)

8. MD 355 at West Old Baltimore Road (Intersection improvement)

9. Piedmont Road Shared Use Path (from Stringtown Road to Skylark Road)

The Frederick Road Bike path and Clarksburg Shared Use Path projects will build a continuous path along Frederick Road/MD 355 from the North Germantown Trail Connector to Little Bennett Regional Park. Work on the former should start this spring, and on the latter at the end of 2018. 

image from www.montgomerycountymd.gov
image from www.montgomerycountymd.gov

The Piedmont Road Shared Use Path, meanwhile, will connect bike facilities on Snowden Farm Parkway to others on Skylark Road. 

In addition, the Snowden Farm Parkway at Clarksburg Rd Intersection improvement will include new bike lanes and a 10 foot wide shared-use path Clarksburg Road.  That will combine with the Clarksburg Road and MD 355 intersection improvement to extend the same path all the way to Redgrave Place. Construction on those will start in April 2018 and late 2018. 

Other projects on this list might have bike facilities that are not mentioned on MCDOT's website.

Exciting stuff for Clarksburg cyclists. 

Transportation Equity Act would make transportation fairer but more importantly, smarter

Earlier this month Councilmembers Allen, Cheh, and Nadeau introduced a bill that would, in effect, pay a lot of DC workers to bike or walk to work. It would make commuter benefits fairer, but more importantly, smarter in that they would reduce pollution and congestion; improve land use and health; and make roads safer. 

The Transportation Benefits Equity Act would require employers who offer parking benefits to employees to give them the option of taking a "cash out" instead or pay a fee. More specifically, they could take an equivalent amount as the transit benefit, the bicycle commuter benefit, cash or one of these benefits and cash. 

For bike commuters it means they could take the first $20 of parking benefit equivalent as the bicycle commuter benefit and the rest as cash. Pedestrians would have to take the whole thing as cash, which is worth a little less because it's all taxable then, but that's because there is no federal pedestrian commuter benefit.

The fee option would allow employers to pay a $100 Clean Air Compliance fee for each employee "offered" the parking benefit instead of offering the cash out. Now I'm not sure about the reason for this part or exactly how it would work. If every employee is offered a parking benefit, then it would seem they would need to pay the fee for each employee, even for those who choose to walk. The math on when that would be cheaper than allowing employees offered parking to opt for cash instead has got too many variables (# of employees offered parking vs. # that take another benefit, cost of parking in the area) for me to immediate see whether a lot of employers would take it or not, so I wonder if Council has any idea. Strategically speaking it might lead more employers to offer no parking benefit - which would have the same effect or better. 

Regardless, the fee would still help cyclists, pedestrians and transit users as it would go to a Transportation Demand Management Fund, which could be used for promoting, improving access to, and educating the public about alternative transportation; reducing SOV trips and developing transportation innovations. Still, I'm left foggy on why this option is included. 

There's also a reporting requirement about the number of employees and what benefits they were offered and utilized. [Which reminds me, does anyone know if the IRS has reported on how many people are utilizing the Bicycle Commuter Benefit and how much it costs? 8 years after passage I'd like to see if it's more or less than was expected.]

image from www.tpbne.ws

As the Post points out the policy has a fairness element

The change, [CM Charles Allen] said, would address a fairness issue for the workers who sometimes turn down a valuable perk because they don’t drive or who are forced to take it because otherwise they can’t get the benefit any other way.

Which is true, but is less important than the fact that it is just smart policy. In fact one could argue that it would be even smarter to offer a LARGER benefit to those who walk or bike than those who drive because of all the negative externalities associated with driving (pollution, congestion, road safety, etc..) and the positive externalities of active transportation (namely, improved public health). Though it might be harder to argue that it is "fair".

A similar idea for federal employees was kicked around in 1993 and WABA argued at the time that this was a smarter policy.

the fundamental goal is to clean the air, and I believe that there is nothing that meets that goal on a per dollar basis better than including bicycles in the subsidy.

The Post also notes that there are good policy reasons for this.  

Advocates for flexible benefits cite research suggesting that traffic congestion is associated with perks, such as free parking, and that financial incentives for non-solo drivers could help cities move toward more diverse commuting.

In the District, experts say a parking cash-out program could be part of the equation to achieve 75 percent of all trips on sustainable transportation, and it would benefit city residents the most because they are more likely to have easy access to other travel options, such as Capital Bikeshare, bus and Metro.

About 40 percent of D.C. residents drive to work, according to data from the District Department of Transportation, while 39 percent take public transit, 15 percent walk and 6 percent bike.

It is unclear how many companies offer free or subsidized parking, but a city survey of 191 employers in 2016 found that 34 percent offer free parking and an additional 18 percent offer a parking subsidy, according to DDOT.

A similar program has worked well in California

A survey of 5,000 commuters and their employers in downtown Los Angeles showed that free parking at work increased the number of cars driven to work by 34 percent, he said.

In California, legislation enacted in 1992 requires that employers with 50 or more employees who offer free parking must also give workers the option to take an equivalent cash allowance instead. But the law did not set any penalties for noncompliance.

The DC bill does propose penalties

Studies of firms in Southern California that offer parking cash-outs found the share of commuters who drove to work alone fell from 76 percent before the cash option to 63 percent afterward,

 According to another study, solo driving to work fell by 17 percent.

Carpooling increased by 64 percent. Transit ridership increased by 50 percent. Walking and bicycling increased by 33 percent. Commuter parking demand fell by 11 percent.

These mode shifts reduced total vehicle miles traveled for commuting by 12 percent, with a range from 5 to 24 percent for the eight firms. To put this reduction into perspective, reducing VMT for commuting by 12 percent is equivalent to removing from the road one of every eight automobiles used for driving to work. In total, cashing out reduced 1.1 million VMT per year.

Cashing out reduced total vehicle emissions for commuting by 12 percent, with a range from 5 to 24 percent for the eight firms. To put this reduction into perspective, reducing vehicle emissions by 12 percent is equivalent to eliminating vehicle emissions for automobile commuting from January 1 to February 13 every year.

average commuting subsidy per employee increased from $72 a month before complying with the cash-out requirement to $74 a month after complying

But DC's law will be more expansive that CA's

Analysts noted that more outreach was necessary and that the eligibility rules were so narrowly drawn that the law applied to only about 3% of the 11 million free parking spaces provided by employers statewide.

I hope that DC's law will apply to the DC government too. I've been hounding them about not offering the Bicycle Commuter Benefit for years. On the BAC's legislative committee, we made a list of every bill we could think of that would improve cycling, and them we ranked them by political possibility. This one came up very near the bottom, so I'm pleasantly surprised to see this get proposed. 

Other than my questions about the purpose of the Clean Air Compliance fee, my other thought is that DC could make this even better by making the cash portion of this (paid to cyclists and pedestrians) tax deductible on DC taxes. This would do no good for MD or VA commuters, nor would it completely balance out the advantage drivers and transit riders get because their benefit is completely untaxable, but it would make the law closer to "fair" (at a cost to DC).

I'm also not sure if this would apply to the federal government, as sometimes it seems that these regulations and such do not, it would ironic if not, since they were going to go it alone ~25 years ago. 

Anyway, this is a big deal for DC and it comes after a year that, from a bike legislation perspective, was the most successful in decades, so it would be great to see it pass. 

Trail Snow removal on the cutting block in Arlington County

Marc Schwartz, the Arlington County Manager has recommended raising property taxes "to address the 'extraordinary' funding needs of Metro and enrollment growth in the Arlington Public Schools." 

The County Board accepted that recommendation in choosing a maximum tax rate to advertise. In addition, the Board directed the County Manager to prepare and distribute a package of potential budget reductions prior to the public budget hearing.

These budget reductions are equivalent to a 1-cent decrease and constitutes what Schwartz would recommend cutting if the County only increased the rate by 1-cent. That list is complete and it includes

21. Trail Snow Removal: Eliminate Multi-Use Trail Snow Removal

Description of Current Service: As of FY 2015, DPR assumed responsibility for snow clearing on the County’s major multi-use commuter trails. This responsibility extends to almost 10 miles of high-volume, multi-use trails during the snow season and include the following: 5.2 miles of the Custis Trail from Lynn Street to the W&OD Trail; 1.25 miles of the Bluemont Junction Trail; 2.25 miles of the Four Mile Run Trail; and 0.4 miles of the Route 110 Trail. The County’s goal is to give these multi-use trails the same snow removal priority and response time as primary arterial streets. This snow removal is accomplished by using two specialized vehicles to treat and plow in small spaces and run with three-man crews.

Impact of Reduction: By eliminating the staff and equipment budget related to trail snow clearing, these major multi-use commuter trails will not be cleared of snow during major snow events at the top priority level. Snow removal will only begin after parking lots and other DPR assigned street routes are cleared.

Reductiion - $50,700

Hopefully, it won't come to that. 

From the Archives: The 1975 DC Bicycle Plan

The first modern bicycle plan for the District of Columbia, "Bicycle transportation plan and program for the District of Columbia",  was written in 1975 (and then revised in 1976 and 1978, I believe) and I feel like I've seen a copy of it, but can't find one online. It had a lot of ambition for the time, but when Jim Sebastian was hired over 15 years ago, the plan was described as "in a drawer for a quarter of a century."

The 1975 plan proposed 75 miles of "bicycle pathways" to existing routes in the District. The 75 miles was to form a continuous citywide system of about 170 miles and cost a little over a million dollars at the time.  The 75 miles would consist of

  • 17 miles of exclusive bikeway out of the roadway (MUTs?)
  • 22 miles in lanes reserved from motor vehicles either by a physical barrier or by lane markings and signs. (so, bike lanes)
  • 35 miles of  signed bike routes

According to a phone survey of residents done in 1974 in preparation of the bike plan, approximately one-fourth of the city's residents owned and used bicycles.

The survey showed that approximately 60 percent of bicycle use is for purposeful trips; 40 percent is recreational. Estimates derived from the survey indicate that 14,000 accidents and 13,700 bicycle thefts occurred in the year preceding the survey.

Both the number of "accidents" and thefts seem very high. 

Thanks to Chevy Chase the interim Capital Crescent Trail is going to suck, just like Chevy Chase

Chevy Chase sucks and, as a result, it looks like the (official) interim Capital Crescent Trail is going to too. 

the route proposed by planners would take walkers and cyclists entering the [interim] Capital Crescent Trail from the entrance near Bethesda Row on a sign-guided route through streets in downtown Bethesda, then north along Pearl Street and Maryland Avenue, east onto Jones Bridge Road and through Rock Creek Park, and then onto roads in the Lyttonsville area before arriving in downtown Silver Spring.

The interim route does not include installation of new cycling infrastructure—such as separated bike lanes—and depends on riders and walkers using the signs to guide themselves while traveling the route.

To quote one commenter

I'm a very confident road/off-road cyclist and ride Jones Bridge regularly on the weekends. It's dangerous and can be terrifying. As a designated cycle route, it borders on irresponsible in its current state. I'd like to invite County planners to ride it during commuting hours and see what they think.

The reason for this route is that the Town of Chevy Chase refused to allow Montgomery County to route the interim trail through its streets once the Georgetown Branch Trail closes for Purple Line construction.

Chevy Chase Town Manager Todd Hoffman said Wednesday town leaders and residents are concerned that the town’s narrow streets can’t safely accommodate the number of cyclists and walkers who may use the interim trail. He also said there are concerns about whether those users would conflict with ongoing utility replacement projects in the town.

Or maybe they're still sore about the Purple Line project which they have doggedly opposed for decades, even though "The Town of Chevy Chase says it has ended its active opposition to the Purple Line and will aim to work cooperatively with the Maryland Transportation Administration to resolve concerns about the line's design. A September 9, 2015, Town Council meeting approved a resolution stating that “the Town of Chevy Chase wishes to focus its efforts on mitigation of, rather than opposition to, the Purple Line.”"

Anyway, the only reasonable thing to do is to create an unofficial route that uses the roads in Chevy Chase. Putting such a route online is easy, but to really be effective, it has to also be on the streets. I see the plan working like this:

  1. Crowdsource a route from the Bethesda end of the CCT to the Silver Spring Transit Center. I'm thinking it would start on Willow and Leland and then maybe Beach, W Beach, Kalmia, E Beach, N Portal and Colesville Road, but that's after a quick glance and without intimate knowledge of the area. I'm sure others from up there could do better.
  2. Post the route on the internet in as many places as possible.
  3. Nap (I always like to work one of these in when I can)
  4. Trail blaze it with a combination of paint and stickers. A few rolls of this could do the trick.
  5. Watch Chevy Chase's utility repairs grind to a halt. Not going to be able to watch your precious "Matlock" reruns without cable are you Chevy Chase?

I'd be happy to help coordinate these things if people are interested. 

image from www.bethesdamagazine.com

The proposed interim trail route from Bethesda to Silver Spring. (Blue line drawn by Bethesda Beat for emphasis- click here to see it larger

Comment period for Vision Zero Proposed Rulemaking extended to April 10, 2017

The Directors of the Department of Motor Vehicles and the District Department of Transportation are extending the public comment period for the Vision Zero Second Proposed Rulemaking to April 10, 2017.

These proposed rules and regulations were a product of the Vision Zero Action Plan from December 2015, which is when the original version of these rules were first released. After public comment the rules were modified and re-released for comment at the beginning of February. Now after a 45 day comment period, it's being extended another 30 days. You can comment at this link.

Below are the main differences I could identify between the two rounds (there's a lot of language changes and clarification as well):

1.  The start date of the side guard requirement for large commercial vehicles has been backed up by nearly a year. The new regulations now cite a US DOT standard for such side guards, and change the punishment. In the original regs, an improperly equipped truck would be issued an inspection rejection sticker and fined $100. Now it's just a $100 fine.

2. It changes the speed limit in school zones and near playgrounds, recreational facilities, pools, athletic fields, or senior centers, when not signed, from 15mph at all times to 15mph from 7am to 11pm.

3.. Sets up a separate punishment for excessive speeding (over 30mph) for someone caught by a speed camera. They will be subject to a fine, but not imprisonment. [The fine that it assigns in this case is one for people going 25mph over the speed limit]

4.The new regs require drivers approaching a crash or mechanical breakdown to slow down as appropriate and use caution, the previous version required that they slow down to a speed at least 10mph below the speed limit and use caution.

5. Lowers the fines

       a. for going 25mph over the speed limit from $1000 to $400 on a controlled-access roadway and $500 on a non-controlled access roadway

       b. for colliding with a cyclist from $500 to $150

       c. for failing to yield to a transit bus from $500 to $100

       d. for failing to proceed with caution around a stationary emergency vehicle, or approaching an incident or through an incident from $500 to $100

       e. for failing to execute a proper right-turn-on-red from $200 to $100

       f. for parking in a bike lane for commercial vehicles and others from $300 and $200 respectively to $150 for all.

       g. for parking on a median strip, island or safety zone from $500 to $200

       h. for driving on or over a sidewalk from $200 to $150

       i.  for dooring from $100 to $50 (and dooring is now defined as "either side" not just the traffic side)

6. Removes the fine for failure to clear a vehicle from a lane

7. Increase the fine

       a. for failing to yield to a pedestrian from $75 to $150

       b. carrying objects that prevents a bicyclist from keeping a hand on the handlebar from $25 to $50

       c. a bicyclist who hitches on a vehicle from $25 to $50

       d. a bicyclist who fails to yield from $25 to $50

       e. a pedestrian who walks suddenly, without the right-of-way and into the path of a vehicle causing a collision from $10 to $100 (note: this used to be defined differently)

       f. a pedestrian who fails to yield to an emergency vehicle from $10 to $100

7. Create a new fine of $150 for a bicyclist who collides with a pedestrian who's crossing a roadway (meaning a cyclist who collides with a pedestrian pays the same fine as a driver who does) and another for $100 if it happens on the sidewalk. There is also now a $50 fine for riding with earphones in both ears.

W&OD Trail improvements coming soon

Soon, three intersections along the far east end of W&OD Trail could become a lot safer. Arlington requested bids on work to provide safety improvements at the three intersections this winter and they expect to award those bids and begin construction as soon as this spring. 

This project will provide safety improvements at three intersections along the W&OD Trail near South Four Mile Run Drive, including South George Mason Drive, the signalized entrance to Barcroft Sports Complex and South Oakland Street.

The improvements include high visibility crosswalks, ADA-compliant curb ramps, upgraded pedestrian signals at the signalized entrance to the Barcroft Park Sports Complex, curb and gutter realignment to reduce trail-crossing distance, improved trail alignment at the South Oakland Street crossing to better align trail crossing and reduce the running slope of trail, and lane reconfiguration at South George Mason Drive and the W&OD Trail crossing to reduce bike and pedestrian crossing distance.

30% Designs for the three intersections show what will change. At South George Mason, the crossing distance will be shorter and the sidewalk connections improved.

Screenshot 2017-03-15 at 12.09.27 AM

At S. Oakland the crossing distance will also be shortened, and the trail will be realigned to reduce the steepness of the climb up the hill (when heading east). 

Screenshot 2017-03-15 at 12.14.30 AM

And at the Barcroft Sports Complex, there will be new sidewalks and curb ramps.

Screenshot 2017-03-15 at 12.16.15 AM

In another project in the area, Arlington is looking to expand the park on the strip of land between the W&OD Trail, Four Mile Run, Shirlington Blvd and Walter Reed Drive, with more space for sports facilities (including possibly a bike/skate park) and art as well as two new crossings of Four Mile Run. One of the three designs is shown below.

  Screenshot 2017-03-15 at 12.29.58 AM

This alternative keeps a riparian trail along the north side of FMR, but alternative 1 does not. 

Screenshot 2017-03-15 at 1.03.18 AM

The Four Mile Run Valley working group will be meeting tonight to discuss the designs and other issues.

Planning for Montgomery County's power line trails could be complete soon

The PEPCO/Exelon merger last year had quite a few sweeteners in it to try and garner support, and one of those was to allow for some trail building on some of their power line corridors, starting with a pilot project. Design work on the pilot project was to start four months after the merger was approved, which happened last May, and according to MORE not only has that happened but those designs could be complete by the end of this month.

The pilot trail is really two trails, a 5 mile natural surface trail that would connect the Muddy Branch and Hoyles Mill trails, and a 13 mile paved trail from the Soccerplex to Montgomery Mall in Germantown.

Hoyles Mill is farther north than the Soccerplex along the same corridor, so what I guess you'll have is a paved trail from Montgomery Mall to Muddy Branch (the long green park about halfway along the line in the image below), then both a paved and unpaved trail to the Soccerplex, and then an unpaved trail to Hoyles Mill.

image from washcycle.typepad.com

Needless to say, this is a great trail opportunity for outside the beltway. It comes out of a 2014 suggestion by Montgomery Planning Board Chairman Casey Anderson, which in turn comes from a group of local advocates who saw the merger as an opportunity. 

The trail...has long been a project of Bethesda resident John Wetmore, a pedestrian advocate and creator of the public access “Perils for Pedestrians” television show.

The county government included the request for a trail in its settlement agreement with Pepco and Exelon after prodding from Wetmore, trail groups and civic activists such as Potomac’s Peggy Dennis.

While Anderson's letter suggested three routes - this one as well as ones parallel to Patuxent River State Park and a NE route from the Potomac to the Patuxent - only this one is specifically mentioned in the merger agreement. That agreement states that PEPCO will coordinate with the governments

to establish a pilot project in its Maryland service territory by which Pepco will grant to an appropriate governmental or private entity in both Counties a limited, non-exclusive license to access specified portions of Pepco’s transmission-line property for recreational and transportation use by the public

And it identifies this route as the first pilot. Any other routes are less assured

Pepco shall follow the implementation of the pilot project, collect lessons learned and identify criteria and conditions under which it would consider future projects to allow access to its property for non-motorized recreational and transportation use.

The other issue is who will pay for the trail and PEPCO thinks it should be the ratepayers.

PEPCO will pay for “reasonable costs associated” with the project, but only if it is able to recover the funds from regulated rates. If the utility can’t obtain the funds from the rates, it would pay for design costs and then work with the county to find funds to build the trail, according to the agreement.

In other words, the newly formed Exelon and Pepco company will be allowed to recover the costs of the trail through increasing electricity rates, a process that would also have to be approved by the state’s Public Service Commission.

John, he brought my attention to the deal in the merger agreement, also notes that there is at least one other power line trail in the Maryland suburbs. A spur off the Northwest Branch Trail to Cool Springs Road in Adelphi is built along a power line corridor, and has been since at least 2008, but I couldn't find any information on how this was negotiated. 

Pedestrian struck by cyclist in Downtown DC dies from injuriess

image from img.washingtonpost.comSad news to report from the DC cycling world today: a pedestrian in downtown DC was fatally struck by a cyclist Thursday evening.

Jane Bennett Clark of Takoma Park was hit in a crosswalk about 6:45 p.m. as she stepped off the southwest curb at 13th and I streets NW. The site is across the street from Franklin Square.

Clark was a senior editor at Kiplinger’s Personal Finance, according to the Kiplinger website.

On Thursday, the bicycle was southbound on 13th Street when it struck Clark, causing her to fall, police said. The bicyclist remained at the scene, police said.

Police have not said whether the bicyclist went through a red light or if Clark stepped into the street against a pedestrian signal. Police said the cyclist remained at the scene and no charges have been filed pending the conclusion of the investigation.

The whole thing is pretty heartbreaking

Clark was taken to MedStar Washington Hospital Center with a head injury. She died Friday. Her relatives did not wish to discuss the incident. Her bosses said that she had three grown children and one grandchild, and that one of her daughters is getting married next month.

It's the first such fatality for a pedestrian in DC since 2010, when 78-year old Quan Chua was also struck in downtown DC (that crime was never solved) and the first in the area since 2012 when 80-year old Ita Lapina was struck and killed on the Four Mile Run Trail.

These kinds of crashes are quite rare, and exclusively involve older pedestrian who strike their heads. This is only the 9th I know of going all the way back to 1905, but that doesn't make it any less tragic or any more acceptable. 

Previous pedestrians killed in crashes with bicyclists

1905 - Professor Otis T. Bullard (89yo) at 9th and N, NW - according to Joseph Meyers the cyclist (who was apprehended 10 days after the crash) the musician stepped out from behind a team of horses and Meyers hit him. He helped him to the curb and noticed Bullard's head was bleeding, Bullard assured him he was OK and he went to work. Only later did he discover that Bullard had died. Found guilty of careless cycling. (more here)

1921 - Professor Emile F. Christiana (65yo) at 11th and Clifton, NW -  He was hit by a special delivery messenger. 2 days later the coroner exonerated him. Death was "accidental"

1979 - A 63 year old man at the corner of 10th and Penn, NW  (maybe)

1983 - An 82 year old man on 14th Street, NW downtown (maybe)

1998 - In DC

2/4/2007 - Gary Scott Phillips (58 yo) on New Hampshire Ave, near 2nd Street, NW - struck by a fast moving cyclist. Phillips  might have passed behind a car that was halted

10/26/2010 - Quan Chua (78 yo) in an alley east of 600 block of Massachusetts NW - hit and run collision

6/11/2012 - Ita Lapina (80 yo) on Four Mile Run Trail near Columbia Pike in Arlington - Passing cyclist hit ped who stepped to the left after hearing "to your left"

Banner design by creativecouchdesigns.com

City Paper's Best Local Bike Blog 2009

Categories

 Subscribe in a reader