Bike Unfriendly Curb Cut on Walter Reed Project

[chris_s]

Looks raised to me.

[Judd]

There’s a significant drop off from the curb that seems to indicate that the raised crosswalk shown in the plans will be installed.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[zsionakides]

@Judd 190062 wrote:

There’s a significant drop off from the curb that seems to indicate that the raised crosswalk shown in the plans will be installed.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

From what I saw today it’s a half raised crossing. It’s not fully raised like the recent change on T.R. Island’s parking lot crossing. There’s still a chute to navigate through and a rather abrupt turn on the refuge area, particularly challenging if you have a trailer.

[Judd]

Temp ramps are in on the curb cuts.

The larger refuge island.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Judd]

It appears that some of the previously poured concrete on the west side of Walter Reed has been torn out and will be repoured.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Judd]

Is the third time the charm? This curb cut has been modified again. It now has a tiny lip and the triple wide curb is gone. It seems that it fixes some of the weird angle issues for bikes but loses the protection from cars.

I’m keeping my fingers crossed for a fourth iteration with a bulb out that restores a protective curb but still softens the turning angle for people on bikes.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[zsionakides]

I hope they take a second look at the NE corner connection to the Walter Reed northbound bike lane. Right now a cyclist must either merge into the traffic lane to get around the curb or jump the curb to get in the bike lane.

[Judd]

Asphalt has been repaired on the trail. Here’s how it transitions into the awkward turn.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[vern]

Granted, that light pole is in the way, but I don’t understand why it’s so important to be able to make a turn without stopping so that a bike can cross at the crosswalk, instead of turning on Walter Reed and crossing on the road, assuming that one wants to go south on Walter Reed. It seems odd to argue that bikes need better access to pedestrian infrastructure.

[Judd]

@vern 190681 wrote:

Granted, that light pole is in the way, but I don’t understand why it’s so important to be able to make a turn without stopping so that a bike can cross at the crosswalk, instead of turning on Walter Reed and crossing on the road, assuming that one wants to go south on Walter Reed. It seems odd to argue that bikes need better access to pedestrian infrastructure.

South of the crosswalk has been converted into a multi use trail over Four Mile Run which turns this crosswalk into a trail crossing. As part of the trail creation, the bridge is losing the bike lanes that were previously there so riding in the road means taking a lane on Walter Reed. For someone like me that’s probably an okayish workaround.

If I were leading a group of 8 year olds on a ride this would be a challenging corner. Or had a kiddo on a trailer cycle like a few forum folks do.

If I jumped on Gillian’s long tail with two kids on the back and made a break for it then Flintstoning the bike around this corner would suck. If I were in the crosswalk and had to queue in the road to wait for someone to make the awkward turn off the trail I’d probably be unhappy.

It’s a tough spot to design around as I’m sure the cost of moving a high voltage power line is cost prohibitive.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[lordofthemark]

@vern 190681 wrote:

Granted, that light pole is in the way, but I don’t understand why it’s so important to be able to make a turn without stopping so that a bike can cross at the crosswalk, instead of turning on Walter Reed and crossing on the road, assuming that one wants to go south on Walter Reed. It seems odd to argue that bikes need better access to pedestrian infrastructure.

Well for one, the wide path on the north side of Walter Reed was made wide, IIUC, specifically in order to be a shared use path for people on bikes (and scooters?) as well as pedestrians.

It connects to the Lucky Run Trail, which is also for people on bikes as well as pedestrians (as the center stripe on it should hint at – where does ped only infra have a center stripe?)

While the delightful sharrows in the right lane on SB Walter Reed is certainly adequate infrastructure for many riders, the fact that Walter Reed is signed at 30MPH, often has high traffic volumes, and is a reasonably long upgrade (which means slower rider speeds) is going to deter many people on bikes – just the kinds of people who are new to riding, and who want to get to the trail network. In fact some even use the Lucky Run Trail to go NB on Walter Reed, despite the downhill being easier and more comfortable for people with intermediate levels of strength and confidence.

Alexandria is adding density at King and Beauregard. There will be a bike share station. Eventually when the West End Transitway is complete, there will be a wide shared used path on Beauregard. When the Alexandria Gateway project is completed, there will be a wide shared use path on the west side of King from Beauregard to North Hampton. Those facilities are designed for the “interested but concerned” riders. It would be a shame if it were hard for them to access the regional trail network – while its great that the folks who can zoom confidently up Walter Reed use the trail network (though it would be better for all concerned if more of them would make an effort to ride at a pace appropriate to trails which have walkers and slow riders) the trail network is especially important to the “interested but concerned”.

[lordofthemark]

@Judd 190682 wrote:

South of the crosswalk has been converted into a multi use trail over Four Mile Run which turns this crosswalk into a trail crossing. As part of the trail creation, the bridge is losing the bike lanes that were previously there so riding in the road means taking a lane on Walter Reed. For someone like me that’s probably an okayish workaround.

To note, many people on this forum frequently point out the problems with conventional painted bike lane like the ones being removed – “paint is not protection”, bad conditions in the bike lane itself, drivers coming too close to the bike lane, it encourages drivers to disrespect people who take the lane instead of the bike lane, etc. Arguably having the two options of A. Taking the lane and B. Taking a wide shared use path – is a better approach for BOTH highly confident vehicular cyclists and the interested but concerned than painted bike lanes are.

[dasgeh]

@Judd 190682 wrote:

If I were leading a group of 8 year olds on a ride this would be a challenging corner. Or had a kiddo on a trailer cycle like a few forum folks do.

If I jumped on Gillian’s long tail with two kids on the back and made a break for it then Flintstoning the bike around this corner would suck. If I were in the crosswalk and had to queue in the road to wait for someone to make the awkward turn off the trail I’d probably be unhappy.

It’s a tough spot to design around as I’m sure the cost of moving a high voltage power line is cost prohibitive.

Yes! It’s about designing for everyone, not the fast and fit. In this location, I would investigate whether it would be possible to connect on the other side of the giant pole. If not, I would look at the angles involved. It looks like this would be possible with a trailer/long tail, but that bike would be the only one that could use the curb cut. It would be like the angled curb cuts across N Uhle by the new MOM’s. It’s honestly not the biggest deal now, but it’s not planning for more bike trips.

[mstone]

what’s galling is that if they needed to move the post to make a bigger road, they would. for pedestrians, they just don’t care.

[Steve O]

@dasgeh 190712 wrote:

Yes! It’s about designing for everyone, not the fast and fit. In this location, I would investigate whether it would be possible to connect on the other side of the giant pole.

Someone take a look next time, but I am pretty certain there is 10 feet or more between the power pole and the new pole with the beg button (not in this street view).
[ATTACH=CONFIG]20071[/ATTACH]

[ATTACH=CONFIG]20072[/ATTACH]

I am also pretty certain that this suggestion was made at a Bicycle Advisory Committee meeting long before the project was started, probably by me.

[Author]

Posts