Help shape the future of Rosslyn’s street network!

[chris_s]

Tonight’s meeting will present a new concept plan, quite different from Concept #1 which was presented last October. Final drawings of Concept #2 aren’t out yet, but early drafts of this concept are significantly worse for biking than Concept #1 was. Things to watch out for:

1) Does it provide a low-stress bike route for the entirety of 19th Street? The Rosslyn Sector Plan calls for a new connection to the Mt Vernon Trail at the far east end of 19th Street. It is vital that a first-class bike facility exist on 19th Street moving forward to get people to and from that new trail connection. Concept #1 had a protected bike lane in both directions between Lynn and Ft Meyer with unprotected bike lanes east of Lynn.
2) Does it provide a low-stress bike route for the entirety of Wilson Blvd? Concept #1 dropped down to a SHARROW for eastbound Wilson Blvd between Nash and Lynn Street (with a great protected bike lane westbound). Does Concept #1 fix this problem? or make it worse?
3) Will the new designs resulted in a usable facility? Early drafts of Concept #2 switched from street-level, curb-protected bike lanes to sidewalk-level bike lanes. Many local residents have had bad experiences with sidewalk level cycling facilities along Maine Ave and elsewhere in DC. What are we gaining by moving to sidewalk-level facilities? How does the County intend to design them to prevent bike/pedestrian conflicts?

[accordioneur]

@chris_s 188630 wrote:

Tonight’s meeting will present a new concept plan, quite different from Concept #1 which was presented last October. Final drawings of Concept #2 aren’t out yet, but early drafts of this concept are significantly worse for biking than Concept #1 was. Things to watch out for:

1) Does it provide a low-stress bike route for the entirety of 19th Street? The Rosslyn Sector Plan calls for a new connection to the Mt Vernon Trail at the far east end of 19th Street. It is vital that a first-class bike facility exist on 19th Street moving forward to get people to and from that new trail connection. Concept #1 had a protected bike lane in both directions between Lynn and Ft Meyer with unprotected bike lanes east of Lynn.
2) Does it provide a low-stress bike route for the entirety of Wilson Blvd? Concept #1 dropped down to a SHARROW for eastbound Wilson Blvd between Nash and Lynn Street (with a great protected bike lane westbound). Does Concept #1 fix this problem? or make it worse?
3) Will the new designs resulted in a usable facility? Early drafts of Concept #2 switched from street-level, curb-protected bike lanes to sidewalk-level bike lanes. Many local residents have had bad experiences with sidewalk level cycling facilities along Maine Ave and elsewhere in DC. What are we gaining by moving to sidewalk-level facilities? How does the County intend to design them to prevent bike/pedestrian conflicts?

#1 & #2 resonate with me – I exit my office building on N. Kent between 19th and Wilson and the east ends of both 19th and Wilson are harrowing to ride on.

Unfortunately I just noticed this meeting and can’t attend tonight

[zsionakides]

I’m wondering why Nash St isn’t considered as a connecting point to the Custis trail. Nash’s bridge over 66 is pretty wide and has light traffic, vice trying to get what will probably be narrow PBLs on Lynn and Ft Myer.

Putting a cycle track around the 19th St/Nash loop and a facility on Kent St should make low stress facilities on Wilson less necessary as there would be a bypass for much of the route.

[lordofthemark]

@chris_s 188630 wrote:

Tonight’s meeting will present a new concept plan, quite different from Concept #1 which was presented last October. Final drawings of Concept #2 aren’t out yet, but early drafts of this concept are significantly worse for biking than Concept #1 was. Things to watch out for:

1) Does it provide a low-stress bike route for the entirety of 19th Street? The Rosslyn Sector Plan calls for a new connection to the Mt Vernon Trail at the far east end of 19th Street. It is vital that a first-class bike facility exist on 19th Street moving forward to get people to and from that new trail connection. Concept #1 had a protected bike lane in both directions between Lynn and Ft Meyer with unprotected bike lanes east of Lynn.
2) Does it provide a low-stress bike route for the entirety of Wilson Blvd? Concept #1 dropped down to a SHARROW for eastbound Wilson Blvd between Nash and Lynn Street (with a great protected bike lane westbound). Does Concept #1 fix this problem? or make it worse?
3) Will the new designs resulted in a usable facility? Early drafts of Concept #2 switched from street-level, curb-protected bike lanes to sidewalk-level bike lanes. Many local residents have had bad experiences with sidewalk level cycling facilities along Maine Ave and elsewhere in DC. What are we gaining by moving to sidewalk-level facilities? How does the County intend to design them to prevent bike/pedestrian conflicts?

Three cases A. The Netherlands (never been there, but have read a lot about it, seen films, etc) B. Virginia Avenue in near SE DC C. Maine Avenue in SW DC

The benefit of sidewalk level lanes is, IIUC, greater separation from traffic, with some safety advantage ( ? – maybe only when the in street alternative is not protected by parking?) and also a seperation from fumes benefit ,and no issue with the gutter.The obvious disadvantage is conflict with peds using the sidewalk level bike lane as a sidewalk.

In the NL, IIUC, peds respect the bike lanes. Because there are so many bike riders in them, it would be hard to confuse them with a sidewalk – and because since so many peds also ride, they are more aware.

In the USA this generally does not hold. However the Virginia avenue PBL works anyway, because there is so little pedestrian movement there (a neighborhood almost entirely of townhouses).

On Maine Avenue, where there is dense mixed use, the PBL works more like a MUT (but with a lot more crossings). At times of day and weather conditions with relatively few peds, its okay at a speed that allows for slowing at the crossings. At times with more peds, it requires a considerably slower speed. Clearly, in retrospect, given the success of the Wharf as a ped destination, and the culture relative to bike (and other mobility devices) in greater DC, it would have been better to have an in street bike lane on Maine.

Arlington should consider if Rosslyn will be more like the Wharf or more like Virginia Avenue.

[Erin Potter]

Great to see some of you at last night’s event, and appreciate all the thoughts being shared here.

For those unable to attend, the materials from last night’s meeting as well as the online feedback form are now on the project page. Form closes April 3rd.

[DrP]

@lordofthemark 188709 wrote:

In the NL, IIUC, peds respect the bike lanes. Because there are so many bike riders in them, it would be hard to confuse them with a sidewalk – and because since so many peds also ride, they are more aware.

In northern Germany (Kiel in particular) they had sidewalk level bike lanes. The sidewalks were wide, the bike lanes were wide. The bike lanes were a very different color from the sidewalks and no physical separation (it was a while ago, so I might be wrong on that count). I am thinking something like one was red and the other blue or green. Yes, it was Germany and they tend to follow rules like these more than people here (yes, I can give examples for the opposite for each, but that is the local norm I saw) and there were lots of cyclists, but there just wasn’t too much crossing into the other lanes.

Are the sidewalk level lanes here you mention like that? If I recall, the Maine Ave ones are the same color as the road, with a median between the bike and ped lanes. That might just not clue peds in as much. From my experience, all the bike lanes that are colored green in Arlington seem to have fewer car incursions – perhaps because they are seen so clearly. Might it make sense to color the bike lanes at sidewalk level to be something that peds do not normally walk on?

[LhasaCM]

@lordofthemark 188709 wrote:

Three cases A. The Netherlands (never been there, but have read a lot about it, seen films, etc) B. Virginia Avenue in near SE DC C. Maine Avenue in SW DC

The benefit of sidewalk level lanes is, IIUC, greater separation from traffic, with some safety advantage ( ? – maybe only when the in street alternative is not protected by parking?) and also a seperation from fumes benefit ,and no issue with the gutter.The obvious disadvantage is conflict with peds using the sidewalk level bike lane as a sidewalk.

In the NL, IIUC, peds respect the bike lanes. Because there are so many bike riders in them, it would be hard to confuse them with a sidewalk – and because since so many peds also ride, they are more aware.

In the USA this generally does not hold. However the Virginia avenue PBL works anyway, because there is so little pedestrian movement there (a neighborhood almost entirely of townhouses).

On Maine Avenue, where there is dense mixed use, the PBL works more like a MUT (but with a lot more crossings). At times of day and weather conditions with relatively few peds, its okay at a speed that allows for slowing at the crossings. At times with more peds, it requires a considerably slower speed. Clearly, in retrospect, given the success of the Wharf as a ped destination, and the culture relative to bike (and other mobility devices) in greater DC, it would have been better to have an in street bike lane on Maine.

Arlington should consider if Rosslyn will be more like the Wharf or more like Virginia Avenue.

Even with Virginia Avenue SE – I wouldn’t say that it really works. Every time I’ve ridden through there (I’ve been making a point of going that way when in the area and heading in that general direction just to see how it’s doing – so maybe a dozen times since it started opening up), there’ve been pedestrians walking or just standing around chatting on the PBL. (One even yelled at me to get off the sidewalk, which was comical.) It’s less of an issue than Maine just because it’s a smaller volume of all kinds of traffic, but in my experience, folks still don’t “get it” or care to.

[zsionakides]

@lordofthemark 188709 wrote:

Three cases A. The Netherlands (never been there, but have read a lot about it, seen films, etc) B. Virginia Avenue in near SE DC C. Maine Avenue in SW DC

The benefit of sidewalk level lanes is, IIUC, greater separation from traffic, with some safety advantage ( ? – maybe only when the in street alternative is not protected by parking?) and also a seperation from fumes benefit ,and no issue with the gutter.The obvious disadvantage is conflict with peds using the sidewalk level bike lane as a sidewalk.

In the NL, IIUC, peds respect the bike lanes. Because there are so many bike riders in them, it would be hard to confuse them with a sidewalk – and because since so many peds also ride, they are more aware.

In the USA this generally does not hold. However the Virginia avenue PBL works anyway, because there is so little pedestrian movement there (a neighborhood almost entirely of townhouses).

On Maine Avenue, where there is dense mixed use, the PBL works more like a MUT (but with a lot more crossings). At times of day and weather conditions with relatively few peds, its okay at a speed that allows for slowing at the crossings. At times with more peds, it requires a considerably slower speed. Clearly, in retrospect, given the success of the Wharf as a ped destination, and the culture relative to bike (and other mobility devices) in greater DC, it would have been better to have an in street bike lane on Maine.

Arlington should consider if Rosslyn will be more like the Wharf or more like Virginia Avenue.

IME in the Netherlands, there was still a lot of conflict between peds and bikes in the bike lanes, though much of that had to do with crossings and intersections. The main difference in NL is a much higher bike percentage and a real network of separated biking facilities, not small one off pieces such as Maine Ave and Virginia Ave. Until Maine and Virginia connect to larger protected bike networks, there will never be more than a few dozen cyclists using them each day, and you won’t see the PBLs respected by peds.

[lordofthemark]

My experience on the Virginia Avenue PBL has I think all been in winter months and on weekends, so may well be biased towards times of zero or almost zero pedestrian activity.

[lordofthemark]

@zsionakides 188733 wrote:

IME in the Netherlands, there was still a lot of conflict between peds and bikes in the bike lanes, though much of that had to do with crossings and intersections. The main difference in NL is a much higher bike percentage and a real network of separated biking facilities, not small one off pieces such as Maine Ave and Virginia Ave. Until Maine and Virginia connect to larger protected bike networks, there will never be more than a few dozen cyclists using them each day, and you won’t see the PBLs respected by peds.

The bikeometer on Maine shows around a hundred riders (and scooters?) even on bad weather days, and I think several hundred on better weather days (even though better weather days are days dealing with peds is more difficult) That is still far from what you see in the NL.

I mean lets say I see 240 in the cyclometer. A lot of folks don’t show up in the cyclometer either because their destination is in the wharf, or because they come from 7th in the crosswalk and miss it – so say, 400 riders/scooters in a day. Assume almost all are in the peak hours – say 7 to 9 AM, and 4:30 to 6:30 pm. So 50 in each direction in an hour. Less than one a minute. Hardly enough to make it feel like a “bike lane” to most pedestrians. Far far from NL levels.

[zsionakides]

@lordofthemark 188737 wrote:

The bikeometer on Maine shows around a hundred riders (and scooters?) even on bad weather days, and I think several hundred on better weather days (even though better weather days are days dealing with peds is more difficult) That is still far from what you see in the NL.

I mean lets say I see 240 in the cyclometer. A lot of folks don’t show up in the cyclometer either because their destination is in the wharf, or because they come from 7th in the crosswalk and miss it – so say, 400 riders/scooters in a day. Assume almost all are in the peak hours – say 7 to 9 AM, and 4:30 to 6:30 pm. So 50 in each direction in an hour. Less than one a minute. Hardly enough to make it feel like a “bike lane” to most pedestrians. Far far from NL levels.

100=8.33 dozen, i.e. a few dozen. The NL bike paths have thousands of riders per day. I even read recently that London had bike paths with over 13,000 riders per day, and London is nowhere near as mature a cycling city as most anywhere in the NL. A couple hundred cyclists per day just isn’t that many.

[lordofthemark]

@zsionakides 188741 wrote:

100=8.33 dozen, i.e. a few dozen. The NL bike paths have thousands of riders per day. I even read recently that London had bike paths with over 13,000 riders per day, and London is nowhere near as mature a cycling city as most anywhere in the NL. A couple hundred cyclists per day just isn’t that many.

Yesterday evening the bikeometer at 7th and Maine showed 320 riders, that was 6PM or so, so the number was still increasing. And that omits the riders who do not pass the bikeometer.

Still not like the NL, and I agree that Rosslyn would be better off with in street PBLs based on the Maine avenue experience. But the Maine PBL IS getting more use than some folks may think.

[zsionakides]

@lordofthemark 188769 wrote:

Yesterday evening the bikeometer at 7th and Maine showed 320 riders, that was 6PM or so, so the number was still increasing. And that omits the riders who do not pass the bikeometer.

Still not like the NL, and I agree that Rosslyn would be better off with in street PBLs based on the Maine avenue experience. But the Maine PBL IS getting more use than some folks may think.

It was a nice day yesterday and there were lots of cyclists out of hibernation.

Crystal Drive’s NB on-street unprotected bike lane had 165 riders yesterday, which extrapolates out to 330 if you assume the same ridership southbound. That shows that isolated PBLs probably don’t get anyone riding beyond confident riders who ride in a lot of mediocre conditions already.

Unless a network of end to end protected facilities is built in Rosslyn and connects well to the Custis/MVT/110/50 trails, usage will be limited, and may not be much higher than it is now.

[lordofthemark]

@zsionakides 188773 wrote:

It was a nice day yesterday and there were lots of cyclists out of hibernation.

Crystal Drive’s NB on-street unprotected bike lane had 165 riders yesterday, which extrapolates out to 330 if you assume the same ridership southbound. That shows that isolated PBLs probably don’t get anyone riding beyond confident riders who ride in a lot of mediocre conditions already.

Unless a network of end to end protected facilities is built in Rosslyn and connects well to the Custis/MVT/110/50 trails, usage will be limited, and may not be much higher than it is now.

A nice day means more riders across the region, but also a lot more peds at the Wharf. Yesterday evening the combo of good weather and some end of week event made the PBL very unpleasant to ride in. In general the PBL at the Wharf gets less confident riders – a very large number of the more confident riders tend to avoid it entirely.

I note one reason for preferring sidewalk level PBLs is to avoid illegal parking at the gaps in the PBL. I would hope physical protection and/or enforcement could be used instead, as I think we are not ready for sidewalk level PBLs in places with significant pedestrian activity.

[dasgeh]

I’m very happy that they’re not two-waying Fort Myer north of Lee. That would have created a second intersection of doom.

On the issue of sidewalk-level PBLs: for riding with kids, I absolutely prefer the sidewalk-level PBLs. At driveways with street-level PBLs, it’s easy for a car to pull over blocking the lane or to suddenly pull through the PBL without slowing enough when turning. With sidewalk-level, the cars are less likely to pull up on the sidewalk level to (e.g.) let people out, and cars are more likely to slow more because drive up onto the sidewalk. Also, with more space to cross, a turning car would be less of a surprise to someone biking in a sidewalk level PBL.

Clearly, the design has to minimize pedestrian conflict. At the Wharf, the sidewalks are narrow and blocked with a bunch of stuff. I get why people walking with larger loads, or (e.g.) joggers who just want to get past everyone would take the PBL over the sidewalk. But the primary problem there (IMO) is that the sidewalk sucks. The designs for Rosslyn seem to include beautifully wide sidewalks. That would be a game changer.

I agree that any gaps in the network are problematic. The concept presented had a few (e.g. NB Meade b/n 50-off ramp & Fairfax) that could be easily addressed

Also, any plan must underscore the need for a fix for the Custis at Lynn and Lee.

[Author]

Posts