The ThinkBike workshop in Washington, DC, held on November 15-16, 2010, aimed to explore opportunities for increasing bicycle use through collaboration between Dutch experts and local stakeholders. The workshops provided a platform for discussing bike safety, commuting, and infrastructure, ultimately presenting recommendations for improving cycling conditions in the city. The event was part of a multi-city initiative by the Royal Dutch Embassy, promoting Dutch cycling policies and best practices adaptable to the local context.

1. THINKBIKE WORKSHOP WASHINGTON DC
November 15 – 16, 2010
FINAL REPORT
Sponsored by:
The Royal Netherlands Embassy
In co-operation with:
Fietsberaad International

2. Contents
!"! #$%&'()*%#'$+ ,!
-"+! ')%.#$/+'0+%1/+2'&341'5+ 6!
,"! +%1/+()%*1+755&'7*1+%'+5&'8'%#$9+*:*.#$9+ ;!
!"#"$! %&'()*+,*-.$-/$,0&$1-)2'0-+'$ 3!
6"+! &/4).%4+7$(+'<4/&=7%#'$4+'0+%1/+2'&341'5+ >!
!"4"! 5&.&)67$)&(-88&.96,*-.'$-/$,0&$1-)2'0-+'$ :!
!";"! $<)6.=&$,&68$>?@$6.9$A@',)&&,B$ :!
!";"#"! (C(7&$,-D)$ :!
!";"4"! E-)2'0-+$F&0*.9$(7-'&9$9--)'$ #G!
!";";"! )&(-88&.96,*-.'$ ##!
!"!"! H7D&$,&68$ #4!
!"!"#"! (C(7&$,-D)$ #4!
!"!"4"! E-)2'0-+$ #4!
!"!";"! )&(-88&.96,*-.'$ #4!
!"I"! 5)&&.$,&68$>'-/,$6'+&(,'$-/$(C(7*.=B$ #!!
I"#"$! J,D9C$6)&6'$ #3!
;"! 755/$(#*/4+ !?!
I"4"$! K-8+-'*,*-.$-/$,0&$,&68'$ #:!
I";"! %D,(0$&L+&),'$ #M!
I"!! N)-=)68$ 4#!
I"I"! <O&)O*&1$-/$8&9*6$(-O&)6=&$ 44!
I"P"! N)&'&.,6,*-.'$ 4I!
I"3"! N*(,D)&'$ I:!
I":"! <1.$&L+&)*&.(&'$ IM!
2

3. 1. Introduction
Through a multi-city initiative called “ThinkBike Workshops”, the Royal Dutch Embassy
in Washington, DC has invited Dutch experts of Fietsberaad International to visit
Canadian and US cities to discuss possibilities for increased bicycle use. Fietsberaad is
the Dutch centre of expertise on bicycle policy disseminating its knowledge and
expertise abroad. The ThinkBike workshops bring together Dutch bike experts, local
politicians, planners, advocates, engineers and business people in each city to plan and
discuss how it can become more bike-friendly by applying aspects of the Dutch
approach. Teams consisting of Dutch experts and a mix of local experts convene for two
days during which they survey the cities by bike and discuss in workshop format how
streets, intersections and whole neighborhoods can be improved for optimal bicycle use.
Topics of discussion at the workshops include bike safety, bike commuting, biking to
school, bike parking, bikes and public transport, law enforcement, etc. The workshops
consist of a kick-off session, open to the general public, followed by the workshops
behind closed doors and conclude with a closing session, also open to the public, where
the recommendations are presented by the teams. Washington, DC was the third city to
host the bike workshops (after Toronto and Chicago); they took place on November 15
and 16, 2010.
In close cooperation with the City of Washington, DC and the Metropolitan Washington
Council of Governments, two teams (orange and blue) were formed comprising three
Dutch experts and a number
of local bike experts from !"#$%&'(%&()*+,%&'-.&(
various backgrounds to !"#$%&'&()#*+&%(%,'#*+&,-.#
address two design • /012#3%()-#45#6%7)#(+8)-#
,?
assignments as well as a • 910#3%()-#45#-):+;+,)<#&'&()#,;+&7-#=9> #@,;)),#"'&()#A;+&7B##
long term strategy on • >C#3%()-#45#6%7)#,;+%(-#
• C/#3%()-#45#-%D8)<#6%7)#;4E,)-#
promoting cycling and a • FG);#9H2II#6%7)#;+&7-#%8-,+(()<#-%8&)#2II2#
better marketing and • "+:%,+(#$%7)-?+;)H#,?)#(+;D)-,#6%7)#-?+;%8D#8),J4;7#%8#,?)#K1@1H#&E;;)8,('#
communication strategy on ?+-#9IL#-,+,%48-#+8<#L>I#6%7)-#%8#!"#+8<#M;(%8D,48#
cycling. !"#A;+8-:4;,+,%48#*+&,-#=K1@1#")8-E-H#2II0B.#
• 21NO#=LHICC#<+%('B#45#!%-,;%&,#;)-%<)8,-#6%7)<#,4#J4;7##
At the workshops the • 92O#=NCHCNC#<+%('B#45#!%-,;%&,#;)-%<)8,-#J+(7)<#,4#J4;7##
experts exchanged views on • NCO#=9I0H9C/#<+%('B#45#!%-,;%&,#;)-%<)8,-#&433E,)<#6'#:E6(%&#
how Dutch bicycle policies ,;+8-:4;,+,%48#
and best practices could be • N>O#=4;#00HLI2B#45#!%-,;%&,#;)-%<)8,-#<4#84,#4J8#+#34,4;#G)?%&()#
best implemented in the • //O#=9N2HCI9B#45#!%-,;%&,#;)-%<)8,-#&433E,)<#6'#34,4;#G)?%&()#
various practical situations
in Washington, DC.
Furthermore, the Dutch experts discussed the Dutch philosophy and principles behind
the approach to promote cycling and how to implement these elements in Washington,
DC. A small group of both teams also looked into how the various Dutch methods could
be applied to a long term marketing and communication strategy for Washington, DC.
3

4. 2. Outline of the workshop
This report presents the results of the two days’ ThinkBike workshop in Washington, DC
held on November 15-16, 2010. Objectives of the workshop were:
a) An exchange of views on bicycle policy applied in a practical situation (corridor or
area) in Washington, DC and possible integration of Dutch ideas and best
practices in the Washington situation;
b) To disseminate the philosophy and principles behind the Dutch approach to
promote cycling and the possibilities to implement elements of the same in
Washington DC;
c) To discuss Dutch methods of marketing and communication for a long term
strategy to promote bicycling
The two ThinkBike teams (orange and blue) both worked on a different design
assignment, while a small group of both teams worked on a long term strategy on
promoting cycling for Washington, DC by applying various Dutch methods of marketing
and communication. The Dutch experts presented the philosophy and principles of the
Dutch approach to promote cycling and discussed the possibilities to implement these
methods in the Washington cycling strategy. However, it was definitely not a “one way”
discussion: the local experts gave an overview of the already implemented bike projects
and the ones in progress in the District, which resulted in a lively discussion with the
Dutch experts.
Part of the workshop was a bike tour along the two design areas and the city center of
Washington, DC. We had good discussions on how streets, intersections and whole
neighborhoods can be improved for optimal bicycle use. Topics of the discussions at the
workshop also included: bike safety, bike commuting, cycling to school, bicycle parking
the integration of cycling and public transport, law and enforcement.
The workshop started with a public kick-off session on Monday, November 15 with a
presentation about “Cycling in the Netherlands”, followed by a cycling tour to the two
design areas. The presentation can be viewed at
http://www.slideshare.net/DutchEmbassyDC/thinkbike-dc-work
On Tuesday, the workshop ended with a closing session open to the general public at
the Columbus Club at Union Station. At this session the various presentations and final
recommendations where presented to the audience. Two Congressional members,
Congressman Petri (R-Wisconsin) and Blumenauer (D-Oregon), both co-chairs of the
Bike Caucus attended the meeting; both presented their views on the advantages of
biking to give a boost on cycling in the Washington, DC area.
These workshops have been carried out by Fietsberaad International and are part of a
series of workshops that have been made possible by the Royal Dutch Embassy in
Washington, DC. Fietsberaad International is the Dutch bike centre that disseminates
Dutch knowledge and expertise about cycling policy abroad.
4

5. We would like to thank the representatives from DDOT and MWCOG and all participants
who took part in these workshops. Our special thanks go to Jim Sebastian (District
Department of Transportation DDOT), Michael J. Farrell (Metropolitan Washington
Council of Governments) and in particular to Megan Kanagy (DDOT) for the way she
organized everything to perfection.
3. The Dutch approach to promoting cycling
The Netherlands is considered to be the world’s “number one” cycling country: in modal
share (27% of all trips are by bike), in quality and quantity of bicycle infrastructure as
well as the way bicycle policy is integrated in town and country
planning and transport policy. The “Design manual for bicycle traffic”
(CROW, June 2007) is the world’s leading manual for bicycle
infrastructure. For a comprehensive picture of all aspects of the Dutch
approach, visit the website http://www.fietsberaad.org where you can
find the Design Manual as well as the publication “Cycling in the
Netherlands”.
The Dutch philosophy on cycling is based on four pillars:
• cycling is joy, easy and healthy
• safety is important; if people do not feel safe, bicycle use decreases
• a significant amount of cycling can only be achieved with a high quality of
infrastructure and integrated town and transport planning
• political interest and support to make cycling an accepted mode of transport
With these goals in mind, designing bicycle infrastructure translates into the following
basic approach:
road categorization
It is important to designate certain roads for car traffic only and no bicycle use
(Interstates, Highways, Beltways). These roads are not safe for cyclists because of the
high speeds and high intensity of cars. Other roads are more suitable for (separate)
bicycle routes: main roads (40 mph., 30 mph) and residential roads (35 mph., 25 mph).
separated bicycle facilities are the best option
This can be achieved by a totally separated bicycle infrastructure, but it can also be
realized by a bicycle path separated from the car lane by for instance a strip of grass or
concrete.
The problem with on-road bike lanes, especially the ones on the left side of parked cars,
is that they do not feel safe. There is no protection from the fast-moving car traffic and
there is a great risk of being ‘doored’. A better option in this case is to have the bike
facility on the right side of the parked cars, between the parking space and the sidewalk,
so that the cyclist is protected by the parked car.
5

6. mixed traffic: take extra measures
Traffic calming is essential with mixed traffic (25 mph for cars), facilitated by speed
bumps, chicanes, etc. In residential areas it is possible to divert through traffic to the
main roads byallowing only cars from residents and visitors in the area (for instance by
creating detours for cars and not for bikes, allowing bikes to cross and cars not). When a
separate bike facility cannot be realized on an important bicycle link, and a low intensity
of cars needs to be allowed (e.g. giving access to shops or homes), the solution could
be to create a so-called fietsstraat: a road where cars have to give bikes right-of-way at
all times and are not allowed to pass the cyclist.
special provisions at intersections
Special provisions at intersections could consist of:
• tunnels and bridges under/over main highways to create safe bicycle routes,
• make clear markings at intersections with colored (elevated) bicycle lanes and
extra signs,
• bicycle traffic lights at busy intersections
or at junctions to protect cyclists from cars (safety aspect),
• “bike boxes” (colored street sections for bicycles in front of cars at traffic lights)
which gives cyclists a jumpstart and prevents accidents with cars making a right
turn. It is also a good measurement to protect cyclists from car exhaust fumes.
quality infrastructure
Provide colored pavement and use all kind of signs and infrastructural measurements to
make the bike infrastructure recognizable and of high quality. In addition, parking
facilities for bicycles should be of good quality and should either be guarded or provide
possibilities to secure bikes safely.
protect cyclists by law enforcement
The legal system should protect the vulnerable road user. This means that car drivers
should take full responsibility and have full liability when driving a vehicle that can cause
danger and accidents. Car drivers should be aware that bicyclists sometimes are
uncoordinated, especially when children are involved or when the weather is bad (rainy,
snow, windy). Furthermore, car drivers should be educated in sharing the road with
bicyclists in order to avoid accidents.
6

7. 4. Results and observations of the workshop
It has been proven that it is possible to apply the Dutch philosophy in bike promotion
and implement some of the Dutch design principles in the Washington cycling strategy.
Because the situations are sometimes totally different from the Netherlands, it is difficult
to implement all Dutch design principles in concrete Washington-situations. Therefore it
is very important to adapt the advice on a local scale. Over all, the concept of the
ThinkBike workshop works very well.
At the workshops it appeared that on the surface some Dutch examples seemed
unrealistic and difficult to apply Dutch reference situations to Washington-situations.
Therefore the guidance process by the Dutch experts during the workshops was very
important: they served as the catalysts for the American participants. The workshops
provided the local experts with the opportunity to work two full days on ‘bicycling only’;
the workshops worked like a "pressure cooker": in a short, limited time the participants
were able to produce some good results.
The composition of the two teams, consisting of local experts of mixed background and
the Dutch experts, proved to be key for a successful workshop. Also the size of the
teams, 12 participants per team, was good and seemed to create a boost of energy.
On Tuesday afternoon a small group from both teams looked into the long term cycling
strategy for Washington, DC, incorporating Dutch methods of marketing, education,
enforcement and communication.
Late Tuesday afternoon, the teams got a little bit nervous because all groups were still
busy with the preparation of their presentations. They also had to integrate them into
one presentation for the closing session at the Columbus Club in Union Station
scheduled for 5:00PM. But they succeeded and the products of the teams were
presented by a mixture of Washington and Dutch experts. A very good example of an
inspiring collaboration!
!"#"$$ %&'()*+,*-.$-/$,0&$1-)2'0-+'$
On 15 November, 2010, the ThinkBike workshops were kicked off in the Council of
Governements Board Room by Dutch Ambassador Mrs. Renee Jones-Bos, transport
director of DDOT, Mr. Gabe Klein and Dutch teamleader, Cor van der Klaauw. The latter
gave a presentation on Dutch cycling infrastructure and
policy. Pex Langenberg, Counselor for Transportation at
the Dutch Embassy had the overall co-ordination at the
kick-off meeting. The first part of Monday afternoon, both
teams surveyed the two study areas by bike. After the
cycling tour each team went behind closed doors.
Because both teams consisted of 12 members, a further
7

8. split was made in two groups of 6 people, so each group could work on its own design
street or area.
!"3"$ 4&.&)56$)&(-77&.85,*-.'$-/$,0&$1-)2'0-+'$
• Cycling is good for the environment, it reduces stress, decreases car traffic, and
gives people joy and happiness,
• bike infrastructure and smart street design encourage cycling, and reduce conflict
with automobiles,
• bicycle infrastructure doesn’t have to be expensive – “a can of paint” is an easy
and cheap method and works for a long time,
• cycling is like water: it chooses the easiest and shortest way,
• take the whole bicycle network into consideration, not just the two picked routes
(M and L Street, NW)
• some routes should be of high quality and have the right of way (green waves)
• other routes can be bike-safe and don’t require big changes
• law enforcement and liabilities encourage safety for bicyclists
!"9"$ $:)5.;&$,&57$<=>$5.8$?>',)&&,@$
!"9"#"$(A(6&$,-B)$
The cycle tour with Megan Kanagy
started in the study area L and M Street
NW, Washington DC. Our departure was
the bicycle parking at Union Station with
renting bikes for those team members
that did not have their own bike
We continued on the bicycle lanes in the
middle of Pennsylvania Avenue. Yeah
that was great!
8

9. At some points in the study area Megan
explained us the various problems to
implement cycling measures.
Existing street design of M Street….
and the very difficult and width cross
section with Connecticut Avenue. We
had lots of discussions how cyclists from
two directions could safely and
comfortably cross this intersection.
Parked cars at entrances and exits on
both sides in the Central business
district is a great safety problem for the
cyclist.
We even looked for cycling possibilities
on K Street, by using the parallel street.
But this street was way too busy with
parked cars and delivery vans.
9

10. On the main streets there are lots of
buses with bike racks in front.
We looked at L Street and saw the same
challenges as we saw on M Street in the
Cental business district? There should
be more opportunities for shared space
in the neighbourhood!
We saw a good example of a separate
bicycle lane in two directions that has
been realized on 17th street. Part of the
route was under construction, but it looks
good already.
!"9"3"$C-)2'0-+$D&0*.8$(6-'&8$8--)'$
We started with a short introduction and discussion with the participants about the
objectives we have to work on to get everyone on the same page. Some of them
wanted to discuss the principles of the whole cycling network in Washington DC. We
concluded that it would be most effective to use the Dutch expertise and start with the
concrete routes and practical design.
We divided the tasks and it was nice to see that in both groups, there were organizers,
designers, writers and investigators. Also the collaboration of participants from both
Washington, DC and the suburbs who, in some cases met each other for the first time,
was great.
Both teams had a good mixture of planners, engineers, advocates, a policeman and
business people. The only participants we missed were “the creative designers”, who
think “out of the box”. Most people had a technical or commercial background.
10

11. During the workshop an exchange of views took place on bicycle policy applied in the
various practical situations in Washington with possible integration of Dutch ideas and
also best practices from Denmark and Canada.
The Dutch experts gave their advice how streets, intersections and neighborhoods can
be improved for optimal cycling use.
The Dutch conclude that there is enough space in Washington for cyclists but you have
to make clear choices and that would mean less car parking along the streets (CBD) and
less driving lanes for cars in some neighborhoods.
Less traffic lights and more priority for cyclists on the main cycling routes should be a a
priority in Washington, DC.
!"9"9"$)&(-77&.85,*-.'$
M and L Street can become a key cross-town bike connection between existing trails
and paths. To achieve this high quality cycle route, the following facilities have to be
implemented:
a two-way cycle path implemented on the whole
route
in the CBD: on-street parking can be rearranged
to protect cyclists
in neighborhoods: fewer lanes are needed for car
traffic
right turn bike boxes at intersections
innovative feature 2-stage left turn box
colored pavement for cycle paths at intersections
special signals for cyclists
#
11

12. !"!"$ E6B&$,&57$
!"!"#"$(A(6&$,-B)$
Exploration of the design area started with the Downtown
connection and the waterfront of the Potomac River. We
saw I Street and a new cut-through to M Street. Also new
developments, like the Ballpark and new office blocks.
A more visual impression of our exploration can be found
at
http://www.everytrail.com/view_trip.php?trip_id=910092
!"!"3"$C-)2'0-+$$
We discussed the needs for cycling in the area from the four most common Dutch
perspectives for bicycle use: school-, shopping-, recreation and commuting trips. The
schools at I Street, the supermarket at M Street and the Metro stations are important
focus areas for cyclists. Connections between the Anacostia Riverwalk Trail and the
Southwest Waterfront are necessary for recreational purposes. I Street and P Street are
the most logical connection and are in need of a bicycle boulevard principle or a
separated bicycle path. The connection between the area with Capitol Hill and
Downtown must become clearly marked for commuters and visitors.
The second day, the team was divided into two groups, to
redesign major intersections, streets and signing. Both
groups worked adequately with applicable laws, right of
way and cost in mind. All solutions presented are possible
to construct.
!"!"9"$)&(-77&.85,*-.'$
I Street
bicycle boulevard principles
possibly limit through-volumes by
restricting traffic every 2-3 blocks
12

13. traffic calming measures, for example
pedestrian traffic islands
green wave configuration
option for bicycle tunnel on I Street and
South Capitol Street
colored bicycle lanes
M Street
one-way cycle track on both sides of the
street
cycle tracks buffered by a landscape strip
with trees
streetcar and stations on a median
alignment
bicycle signals at intersections with high
right turn volumes
unique right-turn configuration
Southwest and Stadium Area
4th Street bike lanes north of P Street to
Mall/Pennsylvania Avenue.
P Street bicycle track (River Trail to South
Capital)
13

14. South Capital bicycle track (Potomac Ave to
P St)
Potomac Ave/Frederick Douglas
Bridge/River Trail access, signage connects
to existing bike lanes and new bicycle tracks
Cycle Track at Anacostia River Trail on 2nd St
Lead Bicycle / Pedestrian Signal Interval
across Potomac Ave & P Street at South
Capitol
Major Bicycle/Pedestrian Crossroads
!"F"$ 4)&&.$,&57$<'-/,$5'+&(,'$-/$(A(6*.;@$
Six members of the two teams had an intensive discussion about the “soft” aspects of
cycling. We discussed three aspects: law enforcement, education and
promotion/marketing of cycling.
Law enforcement
• exemplary behavior: more policemen should be seen on bike”. Out of an
educational point of view, when policemen are cycling it must be a good mode of
transport.
• more communication about traffic rules: not only for cyclists (waiting for a red
light) but also for car drivers. They have to learn to deal with cyclists in traffic. The
difficulty here is that more than two thirds of car drivers are coming into the city
from outside Washington, DC.
• some rules are difficult to enforce.
Education
• The Capital Bike share program has currently 4,000 members, two months after
its introduction in November 2010. It was introduced to stimulate more people to
use the bicycle in Washington, DC: if people see other people bike it has a
stimulating effect. Here the principle works: “It feels good, so spread the word.”
Each bike is used for 2 á 3 trips per day.
• Education takes time; after one campaign the use of the bicycle will not improve.
An approach of continuous attention: “education permanente” is key.
14

15. • Exemplary behavior: parents must give their kids a good example by using bikes
to school etc. Also: movie stars, influential people, sports men and women,
politicians etc. should give a good example.
• “Try a bike” class (WABA, bike shops, DDOT). Work with churches, health
centers (doctors, nurses), youth centers.
• Provide free trial on the Capital Bikes program or give discounts on annual
memberships. Hold classes and do outreach programs at Universities, community
colleges, etc.
• Bike education at schools.
• Another way to stimulate cycling is by organizing special events, for instance the
NYC bike tour (New York).
• More and better cycling education: in the Netherlands, a 12 year old takes 40
classes and needs to pass a written test (5 questions) and a practical cycling
exam.
Promotion
• Posters, displays
• Banners on lampposts
• Stimulate cycling by ethnic minorities (Africans, Asians)
• Radio ads, internet videos
• Marketing areas around new bikeways (you have to tell people that there is a bike
path in their neighborhood)
Other policies
• More/better sign posting
• Make driving/parking more expensive:
The Netherlands: gas: $9/gallon; parking: $20/day
• Monitoring bicycle use: counting, surveys
15

16. 5. Appendices
5.1. Team assignments
orange team
blue team
5.2. Composition of the teams
orange team
blue team
5.3. Dutch experts
5.4. The program
5.5. Overview of media coverage
5.6. Presentations
orange team
blue team
green team
5.7. Pictures
5.8. Own experiences
Willem Bosch
Cor van der Klaauw
Herbert Tiemens
16

17. F"#"$$ G,B8A$5)&5'$
Each team focussed on one area of the city. Each team had a bike tour in the chosen
area. During the bike tour, the team members got more or less familiar with the situation
of the study area.
Study Area 1: Downtown Area, with the focus on L and M streets, NW
Description
• urban core of DC with high building densities
• high transit, vehicle and pedestrian volumes
• high demand for on-street parking
• L and M Streets are one-way streets providing east-west connections through
Downtown
Problem statement
Explore the expansion of the downtown bicycle network. Identify 1 or 2 key bicycle
corridors both east-west and north-south through the downtown core. Evaluate DDOT's
proposed partially separated bicycle lanes on L and M Streets, NW, with consideration
for traffic volumes, turning volumes and parking demand.
Recommend design solutions, including the option of separated lanes, for L and M
Streets or alternative corridors.
Study Area 2: South Waterfront Area
Description
• larger blocks and issues with street connectivity
• several major destinations: Navy Yard, National Parks, Fort Lesley J. McNair
Army Post
• connections across the river Anacostia
• bordered by the Southwest Freeway to the north, and the Potomac and Anacostia
Rivers
• M Street, SW and SE provides main east-west connection through area
Problem statement
Explore east-west corridors through the area and connections under the Southwest
Freeway to the north. Evaluate the installation of bicycle facilities on M Street, SW and
SE versus alternate eat-west routes. Recommend design solutions, including the option
of separated lanes or bicycle boulevard treatments.
17

18. F"3"$$ H-7+-'*,*-.$-/$,0&$,&57'$
Team Orange members:
• Willem Bosch, City of Zwolle, the Netherlands
• Cor van der Klaauw, County of Groningen, the Netherlands
• David Patton, Arlington County Division of Transportation
• Richard Layman, BicyclePASS LLC
• Hayat Kelil-Brown, DDOT - IPMA
• Heather Deutsch, DDOT - PPSA
• Fionnuala Quinn, Fairfax Advocates for Better Bicycling Charlie Strunk, Fairfax
County
• Jamie Parks, Kittelson & Associates, Inc.
• Dustin M. Kuzan, MD State Highway Administration
• Molly Correll, Toole Design Group
• Matthew Lesh, US Department of Transportation
• Kristin Haldeman, Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority
• Justin Antos, Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority
Team Blue members:
• Herbert Tiemens, Town of Houten, the Netherlands
• Dave Kirschner, Arlington Copunty Dept. of Environmental Services
• Erik Kugler, BicycleSPACE
• Carrie Sanders, AICP, City of Alexandria, VA
• Jennifer Hefferan, DDOT - PPSA
• Scott A. James, P.E., DDOT - TOA
• John Thomas, Frederick County Division of Planning
• Michael E. Jackson, MD Department of Transportation
• Sgt. Michael Wear, Metropolitan Police Department
• Karin Foster, Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments
• RJ Eldridge, Toole Design Group
• Darren Buck, US Department of Transportation and Virginia Tech
• Greg Billing, Washington Area Bicyclist Association
18

19. F"9"$ %B,(0$&I+&),'$
Cor van der Klaauw
Cor van der Klaauw (Stompetoren, 1956) studied Town and
Country planning at the Transportation Academy in Tilburg.
He mostly worked as transportation planner for the city of
Groningen from 1995 till 2008. He worked on public transit
projects (bus lanes, introducing trams in Groningen), parking
projects and cycling measurements. In 2002 Groningen
became "fietsstad of the Netherlands". In 2006 he was one of
the initiators of the European Conference on Mobility
Management (ECOMM) conference in Groningen (see:
www.epomm.eu).
In 2008 he worked a couple ofmonths for the city of Assen. Since September 2008
he started working for the County Council of Groningen. His job entails a variety of
subjects: traffic safety, cycling and transportation plans with the Ministry of
Infrastructure and Environment in The Hague.
Cor is a member of the "Fietsberaad" (http://www.fietsberaad.nl) and teaches one
day a week on the NHL Hogeschool in Leeuwarden, at the faculty of Built
Environment.
Cor cycles every day to his work and also does the family shopping by bike. He also
uses the bicycle during the summer holidays.
Cor was the team leader of the ThinkBike workshops in Washington, DC and Miami.
Cor is married and is the father of two children (21 and 17 year).
Herbert P.Tiemens
Herbert Tiemens (Eindhoven, 1972) studied Town and
Country planning at the NHTV (Nationale Hogeschool
Verkeer en Vervoer) in Breda and specialised in urban
transport. During a short period as junior consultant at
Grontmij he worked at traffic calming projects and cycle
planning at cities all over the world. Tiemens started his
career in public service at the municipality Pijnacker (province
of Zuid-Holland) in the transport and mobility division. His
work entailed examining traffic flows and designing
reconstructions. The centre project in Pijnacker and the
bicycle connections from Pijnacker to other places were
politically interesting subjects. Important component of his
work was to obtain acceptance for traffic measures amongst inhabitants and other
interested parties.
19

20. Tiemens changed the municipality of Pijnacker for the municipality Houten (province
of Utrecht) in 2000. Here he was responsible for the implementation of the road
safety policy and for public communications.. An internal promotion made him
responsible for the regional traffic policy and long term developments. Important
projects includethe traffic circulation in the redeveloped city centre, the development
of the bicycle park & ride at the main station and a new exit to the state highway.
Part of his work is sharing visitors with his knowledge of the unique principle of
movement in the city Houten.
In his personal life Tiemens uses a wide variety of bicycles. A light-weight traditional
bike is used to commute (10 kms), a folding bike is available for special occasions
and for recreational and sportive purposes Tiemens uses a roadracing bike and a
recumbent.
Willem A. Bosch
1991 - current
Senior traffic advisor municipality of Zwolle, coordinator of the traffic team
Strategic projects:
-Starting up traffic management in the region Zwolle (2010),
-Participation on behalf of Zwolle at Velo Mondial (2009)
-Transport accessibility plan for the region Zwolle
-Bicycle parking plan (2007)
-Bicycle comfort plan “comfortably in the saddle” (2004)
-Bicycle plan Zwolle “Faster on the pedal” (2002)
1981 - 1991
Head of the traffic team at municipality of Zeist
1978 – 1981
Traffic advisor at the municipality of Ede
1976 – 1977
Military service, field measurement officer, artillery
20

21. F"!$ J)-;)57$
Monday, November 15, 2010
Time Subject Audience Venue
9:00 – 10:30 Startup meeting. Welcome by the Team members; COG
Ambassador; presentation about other staff of city,
“Cycling in the Netherlands”; short county, other
introduction of the workshops and interested people
what can be expected. from NGO’s
11:30 – 12:30 Team members get together to Team members COG
discuss problem statements for
Washington locations and
background info
13:00 – 15:00 Teams explore Washington study Team members
areas by bike
15:00 – 17:00 Working on the design assignment: Team members COG
evaluation of the cycling tour and
prepare the agenda for Tuesday
Tuesday, November 16, 2010
Time Subject Audience Venue
9:00 – 15:00 Working on the design assignment Team members COG
and prepare presentations
13:00 – 15:00 Working on non-design issues: The communication COG
policy, communications assignment and strategy team
and prepare presentations
16:30-17:15 Teams getting together and talking Team members COG
over main results and presentations
17:15-19:00 Final presentation A very broad Columbus
audience: Staff; Club at
Council members; Union
Managers; NGO’s; Station
press.
21

22. F"F"$ :K&)K*&1$-/$7&8*5$(-K&)5;&$
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/dr-
gridlock/2010/11/learning_to_ride_a_bike_from_t.html
http://bicyclespacewdc.com/advocacy/48-thinkbike-planning-event-november-15-16.html
http://dc.streetsblog.org/2010/11/18/dutch-planners-school-u-s-cities-on-bikeability/
22

23. http://urbanplacesandspaces.blogspot.com/2010/11/dutch-thinkbike-project-in-dc.html
http://dccycling.blogspot.com/2010/11/thinkbike-workshops.html
http://thecityfix.com/two-way-street-between-d-c-and-the-dutch/
23

24. http://www.watisinwatisuit.nl/2010/11/in-fietsen-in-amerika/
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0DAf3jTj06M
24

25. ThinkBike
November 16, 2010
Cor van der Klaauw, Willem Bosch, and Herbert Tiemens
L&M
U.S. vs. Netherlands
!" American trip patterns
are not dramatically
longer than the Dutch
–" Most trips are less than
4 miles long
–" 20 minutes by bike!
!" But bike use in the U.S.
is much less
WHY?
Sources: Cycling in the Netherlands, Fiets Beraad, Mobility Study 2007. U.S. National Household Travel Survey, 2009, and FHWA Office of Policy

26. Policy Differences between DC and
Netherlands
–"Cost of getting a drivers license
–"Price of gasoline
–"Price/availability of parking
–"Excise taxes on automobile purchases
–"Lack of buses to school
Goals/recommendations for the workshop
!" Apply Dutch principles of bicycle facility design to
Downtown Washington, DC
!" Design high quality bikeway for the downtown
–" Continuous
–" Signature “marquee” facility
–" Bi-directional
!" Bikeway as a transportation connection
!" Focus on bikeway design for L and M Streets NW, between
Metropolitan Branch Trail and Georgetown
!" Extend livability principles beyond bikeways linking
neighborhoods, retail, and economic development

27. Project Limits
!" L and M Streets
!" From Met Branch trail to Georgetown
Workshop process
Presentations by Dutch experts
! " Surveyed L & M Streets
! " Reviewed maps
! " Brainstormed
! " Created design treatments

28. Integrated Downtown Network
!" Design focuses on L & M
Street
!" Key piece to create an
integrated network:
–" North-Souths
–" Diagonals (e.g., Mass. Ave.,
Connecticut Ave.)
!" L & M should be part of an
overall bikeway network
throughout city
!" L&M can be pilot projects
–" Create a larger network,
–" Set robust design precedents
Key Connections to Regional Trail Network
Rock Creek Park
Met Branch Trail to
Trail to Northwest
Silver Spring
Capital Crescent
and
C&O Trails
Custis Trail
Mount Vernon
Trail

30. Diagonal intersection crossing (L Street @ Mass. Ave.)

31. L Street cross section
L Street Intersection treatment

32. L Street/15th Street – Cycle Track to Cycle Track
M Street

33. Treat M Street as sub-sections of like blocks
AADT:
10-13K 16-22K 8-10K
West End Golden Thomas
Triangle Circle
“Woonerf”
Living Zone
Cross section – Thomas Circle to Connecticut Ave.

34. Cross section – Connecticut Ave. to 23rd Street
Dealing with conflicts – parking garages

35. Issues/Areas of concern
!" Snow clearance/maintenance of way
!" Turning movements
!" Coordinating freight/delivery to manage traffic/bike
conflicts
!" Accommodating parking garage entrances
!" Signalization/timing to manage oncoming traffic for
contraflows
Qualities of the facility (meta-lessons)
!" Bi-directional
–" Dutch wisdom: “bikes flow like water”
–" Even in a one way facility, bicyclists
will go in both directions in a
separated facility
!" Located on side where outer bikes
travel with direction of auto traffic
!" Be consistent with, and improve
15th St. cycletrack
Montreal cycle track with different treatment

36. Materials and treatments
!" Use materials and colors to
differentiate bike space
Extend Dutch home zone concepts to Downtown
!" Emphasize 25 mph speed limit
! " Enhance public space/quality of life at key
intersections with the Avenues
! " Create a neighborhood zone along M Street between
New Hampshire Avenue and Georgetown

37. Extend the amount and quality of the public space
such as at M Street and Connecticut Ave.
Implementation – Begin Small
!" Short term !" Long term
!" Paint !" Hard core physical treatments
!" Plastic bollards !" Medians
!" Lane markings !" Curb and sidewalk changes

38. ThinkBike Washington, DC/Team Blue

39. M Street Existing Conditions

40. M Street Recommendations
• One-way cycle track on both sides of the street
• Cycle tracks buffered by a landscape strip with street trees
• Bicycle signals at intersections with high right turn volumes
• Unique right-turn configuration
• Streetcar and stations on a median alignment
M Street Cross Section

41. Amsterdam – Bike Lane Crossing
M Street Intersection Example

42. 37

43. I Street Recommendations
• Bicycle boulevard principles
• Possibly limit through-volumes by
restricting traffic every 2-3 blocks
• Traffic calming measures, for example
pedestrian refuge islands
• Green wave configuration
• Option for bicycle tunnel configuration
on I Street and South Capitol Street
• Colored bicycle lanes

44. I Street Cross Section A
I Street Existing Conditions

45. I Street SW Intersection Revision
I Street Cross Section B

46. I Street SE Missing Connection
I Street Connection

47. I Street & South Capitol Street
I Street & South Capitol Street

48. I Street & South Capitol Street
!"#$%"&''"$()*+*,'
-./'0$1$23&"#$%34"#$534"'$
"3$6.,,$7$8'//0+,9./).$:9'

49. !"#$%"B$()?'$-./'0 =+*,)0"0$%"3H$
I'&'
:/.*30@.$5)9'&$ 6.)/".)/$C/D0"&''"$8.&?)/E
>&.),
;$<.+$=+*,'$>&.*?
A3&"$6*2.)&
8$%"$."$!"#$%"$%<$1$()?'$-./'0$"3$6.,,F$
=+*,'$8."#$G$5)9'&$>&.),$:**'00
P Street SW

50. ! !
P Street SW – 2 Way Cycle Track with
Buffer
Navy-entrances

51. P Street SW (Bus Route west of Half
St)

52. !
P Street SW - 2 Way Cycle Path with Buffer
(vs lanes)
P St at South Capital, River Trail
on 2nd St Potomac Ave & Douglas
Bridge Access

53. To Capital
Bike
Signage for SW Share /
Waterfront / Stadium
National Mall and
Waterfront Metro
P Street Cycle Track
Bicycles Yield to
Pedestrians Signage
& Advance
Bicycles / Signalization ac
Pedestrian Advance
t om
Signal Intervals
Po es
ng an
Tr a
sti ike L
r sti
l
i
ai
Ex B
ve o
Ri nac
e
Av
A
Signage Douglas
Bridge / Riverwalk
Trail / Eastern
Market / Navy Yard
Metro / S Capitol Trail
P St at South Capital,
Potomac Ave & Douglas
Bridge Access

54. SW and Stadium Area Improvements
4th Street bike lanes north of P Street to Mall/
Pennsylvania Ave.
P Street bicycle track (River Trail to South Capital)
South Capital bicycle track (Potomac Ave to P St)
Potomac Ave/Frederick Douglas Bridge/River Trail
access, signage connects to existing bike lanes and
new bicycle tracks
Cycle Track as Anacostia River Trail on 2nd St
Lead Bicycle / Pedestrian Signal Interval across
Potomac Ave & P Street at South Capitol
Major Bicycle/Pedestrian Crossroads

55. Outreach Ideas
1.Target people who do not bike yet
2.“Try a bike” class (WABA, bike
shops, DDOT)
3.Work with churches, health
centers, youth centers, doctors,
nurses
Outreach Ideas
1.Provide free trial on Capital Bikeshare
or discount annual membership
2.Hold classes and do outreach at
Universities, community colleges
3.Target areas around new bikeways
4.Bike education at schools
5.Banners

56. Education Ideas
More/Better Driver training
(In the Netherlands, 18 years old, 40
classes, 5 questions on bicycling on
exam)
Colored bike lanes
Radio ads, internet videos
Reduce speeding (enforcement,
traffic calming)
Enforcement
1.Lights (for bicyclists)
2.Citations to cars (speeding)
3.More police on bikes
4.Waive ticket fee for bicyclists who if
they agree to take a class
5.Points on your drivers license for
bicycle violations

57. Other Policies
1.More/better wayfinding signs
2.Make driving/parking more expensive
• In NL, gas is $9/gallon
• In NL, parking is $20/day
3.More surveys/counting of bicyclists

58. F"M"$ J*(,B)&'$
Pictures online at:
https://picasaweb.google.com/kever53/ThinkbikeWashingtonDC?feat=directlink
58

59. F"N"$ :1.$&I+&)*&.(&'$
Willem Bosch
• Composition/quality of Dutch experts team are important due to intensive co-
operation and planning;
• Composition (diversity) and division of roles of workshop participants are very
important. Preferably more creative designers besides engineers and planners in
order to get a borader focus on the Washington plans and design manuals;
• Process and enthusiasm are more relevant for success than design details;
• own laptop with wireless internet is advisable with better databank with pictures
and films of cycling facilities and in Zwolle and elsewhere, not only pictures of
infrastructure but also of cycling culture;
• I have had ten fantasic days.
Cor van der Klaauw:
• Interested and enthusiastic people, some of them very inspired;
• A great deal of attention for “Soft” aspects: communication, law enforcement. We
should be better prepared for this. There is a need for appealing examples from
typical Dutch best practices.
• Our contribution was limited as far as contents are concerned, on the one hand
because we are way ahead and our solutions are a proverbial bridge too far, on
the other hand because the measures should be attuned
• as much as possible, by those present; in this way the experts can provide the
greatest possible support.
• Good organization and co-operation between the Embassy and DDOT. The
meeting and cycle tour on Sunday (to get acquainted with each other) and the
evaluation on Wednesday contributed to a successful workshop.
• There is a 2-way communication: conveying enthusiasm, and supporting the
Americans to reach their goals. Our contribution can be a confirmation that they
are on the right track.
Herbert
• It was a surprise to me that the workshop participants had a good knowledge
concerning the possibilities of improving the status of the bicycle. The visitors I
receive in Houten never give cycling issues a big deal. A number of participants
were aware of European examples and saw possibilities to also apply these in
Washington, DC. Some participants had an engineering background and had
been prepared clearly to think from the possibilities of bicycle. My personal
impression is that the increase of the use of bicycle is hampered by political
issues and restrictions which impose the legislation.
59

60. • I noticed that the lobbyism in America is a lot stronger than in the Netherlands. To
get cycling on the political agenda a permanent repetition of the message is
necessary. To give more notoriety to the ThinkBike workshops it would be very
effective to connect them to a local bicycle event, like the Tweed Ride (see
http://www.brightestyoungthings.com/photo-posts/looking-sharp-tweed-riding-dc-
style/ for an impression) which took place during our visit.
• The personal contacts I now have with several participants of the workshops, will
enable a two-way communication across the Atlantic.
60