Another accident at the GW crossing

[JeffC]

@eminva 7237 wrote:

Have you ever noticed how poor the signage is on the “parkways” around here generally? I think I remember long ago learning that that was because they are not supposed to be like highways or interstates, they are more of a recreational byway for touring the park (which also explains the unrealistic and unenforced low speed limit). As if the GW Parkway was the equivalent of the drive around Yellowstone.

Just pointing out that as difficult as it is to deal with NPS, I think they have philosophical objections to helpful signage.

Liz

Yes the the signage is awful, lived here 10 years and still get lost. My wife has lived her whole life in North Arlington and still gets lost going along 110 or GW Parkway. The GW Parkway signage is probably the absolute worst, headed north there is stretch with two forks in the road, I always see crazy things there. The signage tends to tell you which way to go to get to a destination but not necessarily what road you are taking when you use an exit. I’m used to taking an exit knowing I’ll get to a certain road with the destination being secondary but the signage on the GW Parkway has it bassackwards.

I avoid taking the Mem bridge in the morning (take 14th instead) just to avoid that crazy situation. Actually you have to cross three intersections before making it back on the National Mall. I almost hit Colin Powell near the Lincoln Memorial getting out of a limo a few years ago.

Good for you to stop and give a report. A few weeks ago at West Falls Church Metro I witnessed a car strike a ped in a crosswalk and gave my card to both driver and ped. The insurance company called me a day later. I also got hit by another car while driving in the traffic circle near American University when somebody ran a red light. DC has a contributory negligence standard where if you are even 1% negligent, you cannot recover. Thanks to a witness saying the other driver ran the red light, I was able to recover and did not even have to pay my deductible. Being a witness is a tremendous help to the victim in an accident, otherwise an accident can just boil down to a contest over who shouts the loudest.

[baiskeli]

Crossing today, I thought of the best fix for this crossing.

Reduce the road to one lane. That would eliminate the two-lane stopping problem, narrow the crossing, and slow traffic down all at the same time. I don’t think it would cause car congestion, there isn’t enough traffic to do that.

The car people would go insane when they heard about it, but they always do that. The Park Service would probably reject it anyway. But it would work.

[5555624]

@baiskeli 7271 wrote:

I don’t think it would cause car congestion, there isn’t enough traffic to do that.

I’m not so sure about that. I’ve seen it backed up due to one lane being blocked. I don’t care, either way, but at certain times of day, I think it will cause congestion.

[theakston]

@baiskeli 7271 wrote:

Crossing today, I thought of the best fix for this crossing.

Reduce the road to one lane. That would eliminate the two-lane stopping problem, narrow the crossing, and slow traffic down all at the same time. I don’t think it would cause car congestion, there isn’t enough traffic to do that.

The car people would go insane when they heard about it, but they always do that. The Park Service would probably reject it anyway. But it would work.

After they just spent several millions of dollars widening the hump back bridge to prevent a back up from where the lanes merge from the 14 st bridge – I don’t share your optimism that it would not cause congestion. They had to add a lane to prevent a back up there.

[Brendan von Buckingham]

GWP will never get new signage or signals. They won’t pass muster from the National Capital Planning Commission which has jurisdiction over GW and the other parkways around DC. This document (p. 126-127 specifically) outlines NCPC’s mission regarding parkways: http://www.ncpc.gov/DocumentDepot/Publications/CompPlan/CompPlanPartFive_ParksOpenSpace.pdf.

In particular, NCPC views parkways as cultural resources, not transportation resources, “Although the parkway is considered a commuter route by many local residents, its scenic and historic qualities are more important than its traffic-carrying role.”

Here are their bullet points:

Parkways Policies
The federal government should:
1. Maintain parkways as scenic landscape corridors, and protect their historic aspects.
2. Encourage local jurisdictions to plan for and zone development in such a way that it is not visible from parkways.
3. Encourage local jurisdictions to minimize––through planning, regulation, and careful design––the impact of development that is visible from parkways.
4. Where transportation system impacts are unavoidable, require action to minimize and mitigate these impacts to maintain parkway characteristics.(emphasis added).

I don’t see NCPC ever allowing interstate type signage or traffic signals. That leaves real enforcement and road geometry alterations as the only approaches. Either get the NPS police to enforce the 25 mph speed limit, or re-build the crossing so there’s a chicane or some other new geometry that FORCES motor vehicles to drive 25 mph. Neither of those approaches would impact the cultural, historic or design values of the parkway.

[CCrew]

Post ran with this yesterday.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/commuting/managing-george-washington-parkways-competing-interests/2011/08/14/gIQA1VSeSJ_story.html

[jrenaut]

From the article CCrew linked

Quote:

If there’s a safe way to slow down the traffic in that 40 mph zone without creating a new hazard, I hope the National Park Service will do it. A HAWK signal brings traffic to a stop whenever people who want to cross hit a button. Any device requiring frequent traffic stops on such a busy commuter route should raise concerns among all people who travel in the area.

I love how the response to “it is important to realize that motorized traffic is not an uncontrollable force of nature” is “motorized traffic is an uncontrollable force”, and that the convenience of commuting drivers is prioritized over people’s safety.

The response to the second letter is great, too – “everyone breaks the law, so there’s no point in even trying to do anything. We should just plan to build a new intersection sometime in the next decade”.

How about this – put a couple of police officers there who will aggressively ticket EVERYONE who breaks a traffic law. Cars, cyclists, walkers, runners, whatever.

[pfunkallstar]

Just as a follow-up, I was crossing this morning at around 7:50 – traffic was pretty light. A woman in a minivan came to a complete stop in the right lane with two cars behind her. I waved and began crossing the intersection. The second car behind her, a small Nissan, actually backed up a little changed lanes and tore through in the left lane just narrowly missing my wheel – AMAZING ignorance. I kind of wish drivers wouldn’t stop. I’m willing to wait for a nice 1/4 mile gap. It just strikes me that complete stops = catastrophe.

[consularrider]

Let’s see, a 25 MPH speed zone with camera enforcement that automatically tickets drivers. That has worked in other areas to slow the traffic down. And how about the ticket money is dedicated to improving these crossings? Same thing with the red light cameras at Lee Highway and Lynn Street? Of course, come to think of it, the problem there is the right turns which probably won’t be affected by a red light camera.

[GreyBear]

I’d suggest removing the crosswalk so that unsuspecting tourists from places like California, Boulder, CO, England, etc., where drivers actually stop on striped crosswalks, are not lulled into thinking that its a safe place to cross. If motorists aren’t supposed to stop at that crosswalk, then what exactly does the crosswalk signify?

[mstone]

@GreyBear 7384 wrote:

If motorists aren’t supposed to stop at that crosswalk, then what exactly does the crosswalk signify?

I’ve long wondered that myself, whenever people claim that there’s no requirement to stop for someone about to cross. I suppose that perhaps they believe that if a pedestrian is in the middle of the street but not in a crosswalk it is legal to simply run them down, whereas it is not legal to run them down if they are in the middle of a crosswalk.

[jrenaut]

Quote:

Let’s see, a 25 MPH speed zone with camera enforcement that automatically launches missiles.

There, I fixed your spelling error.

[Joe Chapline]

It would be safer for drivers if traffic speed on the GW Mem. Parkway could be brought under control. I used to have to merge on to the Parkway, northbound, from Chain Bridge Road, just north of the Chain Bridge. There’s only a short distance where you can easily see the Parkway from the ramp, and only about 20 feet of merge area. Not much time to decide whether to speed up to 65 mph and merge, or stop. I had some close calls there. The road isn’t designed for high speeds.

http://www.google.com/maps?q=Chain+Bridge&hl=en&ll=38.940201,-77.133272&spn=0.006542,0.019119&sll=38.933442,-77.124882&sspn=0.014488,0.019119&vpsrc=6&radius=0.62&z=16&layer=c&cbll=38.940201,-77.133282&panoid=D5xvmu31jQU7lDLr5ovgoQ&cbp=11,331.92,,0,-3.09

[Author]

Posts