Arlington Plans to Remove Bike Lane on Crystal Drive

@chris_s 124269 wrote:

2) If Crystal Drive can do without that curb lane during both rush hours, why does it need it back the rest of the time? Why not 24hr bus/bike lanes? Then at least cyclists only have to mix with buses and not full-on car traffic.

because cars

That transit lane should be a bus/bike only lane 24/7. Also, they can paint it (red, perhaps?) to signify that it is not a lane of travel for drivers.

@chris_s 124269 wrote:

Proposed cross section from the Sector Plan:

Food for thought:

1) Drop to a 7′ parking lane, 10′ travel lanes, 10′ turning lane, 11′ transit lane and BAM there’s 5′ for a Northbound bike lane.

2) If Crystal Drive can do without that curb lane during both rush hours, why does it need it back the rest of the time? Why not 24hr bus/bike lanes? Then at least cyclists only have to mix with buses and not full-on car traffic.

When I first saw this graphic I thought it was just a bunch of people dropped down into the bottom of an earthen pit ala NES era raiders of the lost arc and I thought…yeah that seems about right.

@consularrider 124314 wrote:

So, on the general topic, I never found the bike lanes on Crystal Drive to be particularly useful and am generally “taking the lane” through that area or riding the service road back way from the Crystal City connector at the Water Park to 26th St.

They aren’t great lanes. But they’re what we have, and the only facility my wife will use. None of the other bike solutions in the area appear anywhere close to being installed, and none of them connect to the Crystal City Connector/MVT.

But more importantly, DES is removing an existing bikelane, and not to make way for something better. That’s a bad precedent in itself, normally seen only under the leadership of the Rob Fords of the world. It’s a bikelane that leads directly to one of the busiest trails in the region. But also, they’re doing it quietly, without considering impacts at all, examining alternatives, or providing any immediate mitigations. Take a look at the slides describing the proposed restriping: https://projects.arlingtonva.us/wp-content/uploads/sites/31/2015/09/DES-Crystal_Drive_Proposed_Restriping_and_Repaving_Plan_Sept_2015.pdf

Even if you agree that biking in a part-time bus lane is an acceptable substitute (i definitely don’t, but did anyone ask?), you can’t look at this action and feel great about your preferred neighborhood bike facility. Unlike the sophisticated analysis that went into turning a vehicle lane into the bus lane, there was no apparent consideration given to the existing bike lane. It’s just going away. Not even to make space for the bus lane, it is so all the other existing lanes can be widened.

Moral of the story: If a study will cover a street with a bikelane, you can’t assume like i did that your existing bikelane will be granted the same bias toward the status-quo as other modes.

@lordofthemark 124321 wrote:

Wait the the 23 foot sidewalk includes space for trees, and sidewalk cafes, right? It isn’t really a 23 foot side walk. Because if it were I am sure that less confident cyclists will take it. In fact, I am guessing that even with the trees and cafes, a bunch of people on bikes will end up taking it.

I mean unless Crystal City recovers and grows to the point where a wide sidewalk is absolutely filled with pedestrians, a la Manhattan. But I’ve already spent two days praying for messiah to come.

The problem is that less confident cyclists can, do and will take the sidewalk. BUT we get lots of complaints about that and there’s a movement to ban bikes on the sidewalks of Crystal City. I’ll reach out to the PAC, because they should be aware that if this happens, there will be more cyclist-pedestrian conflict, not less.

But with these huge sidewalks, there should be a better solution than this.

@lordofthemark 124321 wrote:

Wait the the 23 foot sidewalk includes space for trees, and sidewalk cafes, right? It isn’t really a 23 foot side walk. Because if it were I am sure that less confident cyclists will take it. In fact, I am guessing that even with the trees and cafes, a bunch of people on bikes will end up taking it.

I mean unless Crystal City recovers and grows to the point where a wide sidewalk is absolutely filled with pedestrians, a la Manhattan. But I’ve already spent two days praying for messiah to come.

There are no 23 foot sidewalks now, i believe that’s their plannery aspirational view of some future streetscape. This 6-8′ paver sidewalk is typical today: https://www.google.com/maps/@38.8577304,-77.0491279,3a,75y,9.16h,74.76t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sRLLAm1iml5kTXdQYGRqfyg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

Out of curiosity, I checked out the Bicycle & Pedestrian Counter data on the Bike Arlington site: http://www.bikearlington.com/pages/biking-in-arlington/counting-bikes-to-plan-for-bikes/counter-dashboard/

Here is what I found for the past full year (9/14/2014 at midnight through 9/13/2015 at 11:59 pm) for bicycles only:

[TABLE=”class: grid, width: 800, align: left”]
[TR]
[TD]Counter Location Category[/TD]
[TD]Annual count[/TD]
[TD]Annual daily avg[/TD]
[TD]Weekend count[/TD]
[TD]Weekend daily avg[/TD]
[TD]Weekday count[/TD]
[TD]Weekday avg[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Crystal NB Bike Lane at 18th (being removed)[/TD]
[TD]16540[/TD]
[TD]45.3[/TD]
[TD]3915[/TD]
[TD]37.3[/TD]
[TD]12625[/TD]
[TD]48.6[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Crystal SB Bike Lane near 23rd (being kept)[/TD]
[TD]25402[/TD]
[TD]69.6[/TD]
[TD]6283[/TD]
[TD]59.8[/TD]
[TD]19119[/TD]
[TD]73.5[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Crystal City Connector[/TD]
[TD]183762[/TD]
[TD]503.5[/TD]
[TD]51018[/TD]
[TD]485.9[/TD]
[TD]132744[/TD]
[TD]510.6[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]

If I am reading the data correctly, it appears that commuters would be more greatly affected by the proposed changes as the counts are higher during the work week.