22 Mile Trail Parallel to I-66 — Helpful Video and Input Needed

Copied and pasted to VDOT and my Virginia house and senate delegates.

@dasgeh 161677 wrote:

Has anyone figured out the distances between the entrances to the trail? It seems like one would only be able to get on/off the trail at interchanges — how far apart are those?

Thanks

Is that right? If highway interchanges are the only access points, this trail will be even worse than I thought. I’ll have to look more thoroughly at the design. I do know that the interchanges are anywhere from one to five miles apart. The longest gap between exits is from 29-Centreville to Sudley Road, about five miles.

Note too: the interchanges are all with arterials, and most of these arterials are themselves horribly hostile to bicycles and pedestrians. Trail connections to lower-volume streets that bridge over the highway without an interchange are desperately needed. Not to mention direct access into the neighborhoods and business districts that are near the trail.

Honestly, the Custis/W&OD from about McCoy Park to EFC is a 90% perfect example of how one can design a trail along a freeway ROW that offers a pleasant experience for almost all types of non-motorized users and is accessible to the communities it serves. The flaws of Custis/W&OD that we often complain about don’t begin to compare to the enormous problems with this asinine proposal.

How did Arlington successfully connect this trail into all of the neighborhoods it passes through? Perhaps it was easier because the highway took out so many homes that a lot of streets were left “one-sided”?

@n18 161697 wrote:

I think they are spaced about 2000 Feet apart, or about 7 to 8 minutes walking time. This is based on Begin Retaining Wall/End Retaining Wall markings on the map.

Looking at the maps (and I confess I didn’t look at every one), I didn’t see any connecting paths, even when the walls stopped. Infact, I saw a lot of places where vdot would add sound wall so that you have one continuous sound wall exit to exit.

Sent from my ONEPLUS A3000 using Tapatalk

@nosrednaj 161701 wrote:

In FABB’s meeting with VDOT the minimum is 32″ but we got the impression it will be 50″ like Wilson Bridge. We’d like to have the same sound barrier as the bridge has too vs. a chainlink fence. Let VDOT know.

As far as conversion to a lane, we were told the shoulder next to the wall will not be converted into a lane. No doubt the contractor would be upset as that would conflict with getting paying drivers. Might be in the contract. In addition, when inside the wall, the trail is on top of utilities – building a travel lane on top of that might make access impossible.

Keeping the same number of automotive lanes the bike lane as proposed would become the breakdown lane if the Bike lane were on the other side of the wall.

The Utility access makes it a bit more clear why anyone would put humans in the automotive fume, heat and sound backwash of a major highway. The bike lane is more an after thought use of a underground right of way. The bike lane will be peppered with vault lids and likely populated with service trucks working on this and that on any given work day. They are making a suck fest bike lane so the utility guys don’t have to work on the side of the highway and not be behind a wall. it is a utility lane tarted up to look like a bike lane.

@ursus 161704 wrote:

Isn’t that the truth! I remember at the time that path was created that there was much criticism that it was designed by highway engineers and was not designed with making it easy for cyclists. Going from the W&OD to Rosslyn is a fairly large drop in elevation yet the engineers managed to make all but the last part appear to be going uphill. :p

Don’t forget the cool pump track at the bridge to nowhere! I like the Custis. I like the leafy trail and the change ups in elevation and view. You can access it from almost anywhere on foot and many points on a bike. Easy to use and pleasant.

@Vicegrip 161703 wrote:

Keeping the same number of automotive lanes the bike lane as proposed would become the breakdown lane if the Bike lane were on the other side of the wall.

The Utility access makes it a bit more clear why anyone would put humans in the automotive fume, heat and sound backwash of a major highway. The bike lane is more an after thought use of a underground right of way. The bike lane will be peppered with vault lids and likely populated with service trucks working on this and that on any given work day. They are making a suck fest bike lane so the utility guys don’t have to work on the side of the highway and not be behind a wall. it is a utility lane tarted up to look like a bike lane.

Yup, its a bike lane (well MUT technically, but if this is bad for cyclists, its even going to be much less useful for dog walkers, joggers, so I won’t expect many non-cyclists to use it, and not many 8 to 80 beginner people on bikes either) on the cheap – in particular, no incremental right of way. They will take the utility ROW and just cover it with a bike lane.

But that means an outside the sound wall MUT would be more costly, and possibly more disruptive (community and ROW acquisition issues). So if we don’t get this, do we get a complete trail at all? (note, I did send comments to VDOT and to my delegate and state senator asking that the MUT go outside the sound wall, for the reasons we have been discussing).

A blog post about the trail http://usa.streetsblog.org/2017/06/16/virginia-dot-hopes-people-will-enjoy-bicycling-next-to-a-noisy-exhaust-choked-freeway/.