Encourage NPS to fix the Trollheim & Maybe Do Other Stuff on and around TR Island

Our Community Forums General Discussion Encourage NPS to fix the Trollheim & Maybe Do Other Stuff on and around TR Island

  • Creator
    Topic
  • #919609
    chris_s
    Participant

    The National Park Service is starting the Environmental Review Process for doing potential upgrades to TR Island and the area directly surrounding it. One of the potential improvements: Rehabilitate Bridge 31 on Mt. Vernon Trail of
    the George Washington Memorial Parkway for safer pedestrian/bicycle travel. What NPS calls “Bridge 31” you may know as: The Trollheim.

    NPS is accepting comments here on their website through September 8th. They’re also (bizarrely) holding an Open House TODAY from 12:30pm-4:00pm on TR Island itself. So you know, if you’ve got nothing better to do this afternoon, feel free to roll on over.

    I encourage everyone to share their comments here as well so that folks can crib from eachother. I’ll be taking a “Yes fix Bridge 31 and ALSO do all of these other things” approach to my comments. Anything inside this lovely red box is fair game:

    TR.png

    COMMENT NOW

Viewing 5 replies - 16 through 20 (of 20 total)
  • Author
    Replies
  • #1074144
    scoot
    Participant

    @zsionakides 163680 wrote:

    I would rather see one the pedestrian paths re-purposed as space for the highway and the other side doubled in size. If you took away the “shoulder” space as well, you could probably fit about a 9-10′ fit trail across most the bridge. Raise the barriers up on either side and it’s a comparable facility to the 14th st bridge. If we’re going to spend money on an approach to the south side, which isn’t cheap, it would be better to get a better trail instead.

    +1

    Good sidepath on one side of TR Bridge >> Second copy of the awful one that presently exists.

    #1074158
    bentbike33
    Participant

    @zsionakides 163680 wrote:

    I would rather see one the pedestrian paths re-purposed as space for the highway and the other side doubled in size. If you took away the “shoulder” space as well, you could probably fit about a 9-10′ wide trail across most the bridge. Raise the barriers up on either side and it’s a comparable facility to the 14th st bridge. If we’re going to spend money on an approach to the south side, which isn’t cheap, it would be better to get a better trail instead.

    Having one-way facilities doesn’t deal with passing pedestrians on such a narrow path.

    While a reconfigured TR bridge along these lines would be superior, it would take at least an order of magnitude more funding than a Virginia connection to the south sidepath. It does not look like the sidepaths could be converted to roadway anyway as they are not at the same level and are cantilevered outboard of the main beams.

    #1074180
    zsionakides
    Participant

    @bentbike33 163699 wrote:

    While a reconfigured TR bridge along these lines would be superior, it would take at least an order of magnitude more funding than a Virginia connection to the south sidepath. It does not look like the sidepaths could be converted to roadway anyway as they are not at the same level and are cantilevered outboard of the main beams.

    You’re correct, you wouldn’t be able to build out roadway over the south sidepath. The best you can get is removing the shoulders and re-striping to get about 2-3 ft of additional sidepath on the north side, which still would be an improvement over what’s there now. At least passing would be a little less harrowing.

    Ideally, one of the travel lanes would be eliminated and used to expand out both sidepaths to about 9′ each. This would involve cutting the lanes to a 4-2 configuration during rush hour and 3-3 during non rush hour. It would require a traffic study, but may be feasible with the traffic levels.

    #1074183
    bentbike33
    Participant

    @zsionakides 163723 wrote:

    You’re correct, you wouldn’t be able to build out roadway over the south sidepath. The best you can get is removing the shoulders and re-striping to get about 2-3 ft of additional sidepath on the north side, which still would be an improvement over what’s there now. At least passing would be a little less harrowing.

    Ideally, one of the travel lanes would be eliminated and used to expand out both sidepaths to about 9′ each. This would involve cutting the lanes to a 4-2 configuration during rush hour and 3-3 during non rush hour. It would require a traffic study, but may be feasible with the traffic levels.

    Unfortunately, the problem with either plan is that the side path surfaces are about a foot above the road surface. They cannot be widened without substantial construction.

    Stupid design.

    #1074197
    chris_s
    Participant
Viewing 5 replies - 16 through 20 (of 20 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.