Fixes on the trails in Arlington (NOT FIXIES)

[dasgeh]

Another topic of discussion at Monday’s ABAC meeting was the possibility of some funds to repave some of the Arlington-maintained trails. (NOT FIXIE THE TRAILS. THAT WOULD BE BRUTAL.) I believe the trails mentioned were Custis, FMR, the trail-along-110-by-the-cemetery, and the Bluemont Junction trail.

So, forum-nati: if you could repave a section or two of the Arlington-maintained trails, what would you repave?

Topic

[dasgeh]

@PotomacCyclist 75844 wrote:

Is the Rte 110 trail paved? I rarely ride over to Memorial Bridge these days, mostly because of all the dangerous road crossings, and take the 14th St. Bridge (George Mason) instead.

That’s not the 110 trail people are talking about. The 110 trail goes north from Memorial Drive (though not in a straight line — it follows the wall around the cemetery) and connects to Iwo Jima. You can see it here.

[Fast Friendly Guy]

@NickBull 74202 wrote:

I was also going to post about the problem near N Scott St. Just to clarify what the problem is: Heading east-bound toward Rosslyn, just about where the sound barrier next to Lee Hwy ends, the bike path merges onto sidewalk before eventually crossing Scott St., which is the first road crossing on the downhill run to Rosslyn. The merge from the east-bound lane of the bike path to the sidewalk is fine. The problem occurs when an east-bound cyclist has to go in the west-bound lane to pass pedestrians. The merge from the bike path to the sidewalk creates a diagonal edge that can easily catch a tire and cause a cyclist to go down (as it sounds like happened with Fast Friendly Guy). This hazard has been repaired before, but as I went through that section this morning I noticed that the blacktop has worn down / disintegrated in that spot so that the hazard has returned.

Nick

Yep! That’s exactly it….and I’m not the only one who’s fallen here.

[vvill]

Yep I broke my elbow/wrist on a crash right there in 2011. Front tire went in a groove and I landed hard on Scott St. I’d overtaken someone and was moving back to the right side of the trail heading east. The front tire punctured too at some point.

I’m always much more careful in that section now.

[holdthebeach]

If I remember correctly from the last BAC meeting, one of the reasons that trails could not get cleared effectively, even if the county actually allocated money to clearing trails, was that our plows wouldn’t fit everywhere. Since we discussed having bikes with trailers for doing maintenance work on trails, could this be an affordable solution for snow removal? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=reIHx1ozxYk (I saw it on the ArlNow comments )

Even if these could be rented like the county’s snow blowers for clearing sidewalks, it could make a difference.

More info here: http://www.velomobiles.co.uk/2013/01/pedal-powered-snow-removal/

[Steve O]

This is not so much a fix as an improvement that makes sense and also elevates cyclists in the transportation hierarchy.

At locations that are T-intersections with lights, provide a separate “through” light for cyclists traveling opposite the T. Some examples include:

– Wilson w-bound at Pierce (by the Fire Department). Since cyclists are on the far right, they do not really need to stop for cars entering from Pierce. Flashing yellow for cyclists might be appropriate to accommodate peds.

– Wilson w-bound at Courthouse (by Ireland’s Four Courts). Same thing. Adjustments to how the parking is designed here would help. Also, perhaps flexible bollards to delineate where the cyclists are, to prevent wide turning cars from straying into the bike lane

– Military s-bound at Marcey. No reason to stop here on red if cyclists can just keep the right lane. May not even need a separate light, but just a sign, “Cyclists may proceed on red with caution; yield to pedestrians”

In fact, all three of these locations could probably be accommodated with signage, some paint and maybe some flex bollards, which would be cheaper than designing and installing separate bicycle signals.

FYI – I already “Idaho stop” these locations, even though I fully observe the red lights at all the other Wilson/Fairfax Dr. intersections. It’s because these lights are senseless for the cylist in the same way they are senseless for the peds on the adjoining sidewalk.

There are probably more of these around. Anyone?

Part of the point here is not that these changes would make an enormous difference in travel times for cyclists (one staff member asked me, “What problem would this solve?”). The point is more that it provides a visible advantage to cyclists in a completely safe and appropriate way. Observers who note this may be inclined to think:
“Wow, that’s cool. The County is doing a good job improving cycling infrastructure.”
“Hey! Maybe I should ride a bike, too, if I can get a special light just for me.”
“WTF! Now those radical cycle lobbyists are getting even more special treatment. Time to run one over.”

On balance, I hope the first two sentiments would outweigh the third.

[Steve O]

@shannon 74138 wrote:

On the 110 trail along Arlington Cemetary, some reflective striping (or just the yellow line down the middle of the trail would be nice. It is hard to see where the path ends and the grass starts.

November 4, 1998, at night, traveling into the headlights, the only way I could stay on the trail was to ride pretty much directly on the hard-to-see stripe in the middle. Likewise with the other cyclist coming the other way. On the corner near the Carillon we had a head-on collision. Both bikes were damaged (mine was totaled; his probably, too); I broke my thumb and he suffered an unspecified knee injury. It was pre-cellphone for me, so I hobbled to Rosslyn and asked a security guard for a phone to call my wife.

And yes, we both had lights on. It was one of those situations where all the factors just happened to line up exactly wrong.

[Author]

Replies