Memorial Circle Safety Improvements

[elbows]

(Not really related and discussed elsewhere, I’m sure, but my searches didn’t find it.)

Isn’t it kind of unnecessarily difficult to be heading south in DC along the river (say from Rock Creek) and then wanting to go over Memorial Bridge and get on the trail along the Pentagon or vice versa? Every time I go this route, I can’t seem to find the secret that would make this less difficult. My only easy experience involved darting across the bridge during low traffic.

Thanks, will try to submit a comment.

[dasgeh]

@elbows 93453 wrote:

(Not really related and discussed elsewhere, I’m sure, but my searches didn’t find it.)

Isn’t it kind of unnecessarily difficult to be heading south in DC along the river (say from Rock Creek) and then wanting to go over Memorial Bridge and get on the trail along the Pentagon or vice versa? Every time I go this route, I can’t seem to find the secret that would make this less difficult. My only easy experience involved darting across the bridge during low traffic.

Thanks, will try to submit a comment.

You have to overshoot the Bridge, but you can cross Ohio Drive and come back up, as shown in this map.

[mattotoole]

This area is one of my biggest peeves about cycling around DC. Pedestrians have it worse, as doing it “properly” is like an extra half mile of walking! Most just run across traffic.

The whole area should be reworked, but a few signs showing how to get from one path to the other would surely help.

I’ve been through there countless times, but before seeing the map linked to above, I still couldn’t tell you how.

[elbows]

Thanks for the responses and map. I wonder if its actually shorter to cross the north side of the bridge and to turn around before the Arlington Cemetery metro.

In any case, I agree that the linkages through there are cumbersome, that pedestrians are particularly inconvenienced, and that the lack of signage is striking.

[chris_s]

REMINDER: Today is the last day for public comment for the scoping phase of the Memorial Circle Study. I didn’t have as much time as I wanted to really think about the area and propose some more concrete options, but I wanted to make sure I at least put something in there. Here is what I submitted in case anybody want to improve upon it for their own submission:

This project must address all of the various safety issues present in the area, including:

1) Conflict between trail users. The trail is too narrow for its volume of use as per Shared Use Path Level of Service (http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/research/safety/pedbike/05138/)
2) Conflict between trail users and cars. Given the speeds and volumes involved, all trail crossings of the parkway must be signalized or grade-separated. Lots of people are using the park – that’s great, but it also means you need to do some work and spend some money to keep them all safe!
3) Conflict between cars. The parkway is no longer functioning as a scenic byway. If that is supposed to be the character of the parkway as a memorial, then traffic must be calmed. Simplify the spaghetti of lanes, consider removing unneeded connections.

In addition:

Proper trail connections must be provided from the north-side bridge path. You cannot fight human nature. If people walk over there, they will find a way to get where they are going, even if that means blazing their own trail. Provide a safe connection instead.

COMMENT NOW

[dasgeh]

Thanks, Chris, this is great.

I’m typing up my response now. I could use some searching help (since yall are so much better at this than I): a while back, someone spelled out a suggested solution for Memorial Circle that involved rerouting all of the cars under the circle. Yes, I realize that this is a long shot, but I would like to reference it. Can someone help me find it, please?

Thanks!
G

[dbb]

While you are all commenting, please note that the NPS GWMP installed the flashing lights (that we generally appreciated) back at Crosswalk 4. The one they had last year was a loaner and this one seems to be NPS property. We just need to remember to push the button to activate the light.

[baiskeli]

@elbows 93759 wrote:

Thanks for the responses and map. I wonder if its actually shorter to cross the north side of the bridge and to turn around before the Arlington Cemetery metro.

In any case, I agree that the linkages through there are cumbersome, that pedestrians are particularly inconvenienced, and that the lack of signage is striking.

And this was my comment to NPS. The whole area needs more and better signs.

[Terpfan]

I suggested similar to items mentioned above. I also selfishly tossed out considering building a little boardwalk like pass under Memorial Bridge for northbound MVT traffic. I don’t envision NPS narrowing the Parkway where the tunnel is so the only other option to me seems to be going over the water briefly. Given they do cross the swamp further up, I don’t think it’s all that crazy of an idea.

[dasgeh]

For those interested, here is my tome on the issues. You have nine hours to post your owner (or just copy and paste mine):

This area is integral to the Arlington-DC transportation network, and I really appreciate the National Park Service (NPS) turning its attention to improving the safety, level of service and quality of service for all users through this dangerous area. My family and I travel through this area often, primarily by bicycle, but we occasionally walk or drive through this area.
Whatever changes NPS implements in this area, the National Park Police (NPP) should be involved in educating all users of the changes and their intended use. More importantly, NPP should immediately increase enforcement the laws meant to protect lives that already exist and cite dangerous behavior by motor vehicles: speeding and failure to yield the right of way. Fully recognizing that this particular project is long-term in scope, NPS should recognize that the lives of pedestrians and bicyclists are being jeopardized in this area every day. In addition to immediate increased enforcement, NPS should improve the warning signage as soon as possible.
I especially appreciate NPS’ focus on safety in the Scoping newsletter. I sincerely hope that any study of this area focus on the most vulnerable road users. Specifically, this area already hosts very large number of pedestrians and bicyclists, and that number can be expected to increase as our region becomes more dense. I hope that NPS will collect accurate data on how people travel through this area, including counting pedestrians and bicyclists traveling along Memorial Drive. The current infrastructure in this area clearly favors motor vehicles and subjects pedestrians and bicyclists to unsafe conditions.
The most unsafe locations are where multi-use paths (MUPs)– paths designed for safe travel for pedestrians and bicyclists – cross high speed, high volume roads with no protection. These unsignalized crossings are all the more unsafe and unacceptable because of lack of enforcement. The recently-installed and long-overdue warning signs and rumble strips have made a small but non-negligible difference. The warning signals at Crosswalk 4 have increased safety somewhat, but the effect may have been overstated because the signals were new. Pedestrians and bicyclists deserve more than a few signs and flashing lights to protect their lives. They deserve, at the very least, traffic signals with speed tables, which are regularly enforced against motor vehicles that violate them.
In the current configuration, NPS has posted small stop signs with signs indicating that bicyclists should dismount at these at-grade crossings. It is unclear under what authority NPS has posted such signs. Moreover, these signs smack of victim-blaming: NPS has designed unsafe at-grade crossings, at which pedestrians and bicyclists must trust their lives to motorists following DC law that requires motor vehicles to stop at crosswalks. Recognizing that motorists rarely follow that law, instead of increasing enforcement or designing safe infrastructure, NPS has put up signs with no legal authority putting the onus for safety onto the vulnerable users who do not threaten others. NPS should be ashamed, and should take such signs down immediately. If NPS feels the need to warn pedestrians and cyclists of the unsafe crossings until such crossings can be made safer, they certainly can do so with more appropriate signage (such as “Warning: cars approaching at high speed”).
In designing any infrastructure that requires user activation, for example, a traffic signal that is activated by pedestrians and bicyclists, NPS should take into account how such users will use the infrastructure. “Beg buttons”, which require pedestrians and bicyclists to push a button to activate a traffic signal, should not be used when automatic detection is an option. When beg buttons are required, they should be positioned to allow all pedestrians, including those in wheelchairs, and bicyclists, including those using longtail and cargo bikes, to safely and easily access those buttons without dismounting.
In order to truly protect the lives of the most vulnerable users of our parks, NPS should strive to eliminate at-grade crossings entirely. NPS should strive to design infrastructure that completely separates pedestrians and bicyclists from motor vehicles, using bridges, fly-overs, or, if necessary, tunnels that allow for safe, reasonably graded travel through this area.
One option would be to reroute the main travel lanes of the GW Parkway underneath the Memorial Circle, eliminating the need for at least one crossing, and freeing up space underneath the Memorial Bridge to allow for an appropriately wide Mount Vernon Trail.
In addition to the unsignalized crossing closer to Memorial Bridge being a danger, the intersection between the GW Parkway/110 off ramp and Memorial Drive is dangerous for vulnerable road users and for motor vehicles. Drivers are faced with poor wayfinding and warning signage as they approach the intersection. Many drivers create two right turn lanes and fail to stop at the stop sign before turning right onto Memorial Drive. Drivers often ignore the right of way of pedestrians and bicyclists using the crosswalk at the intersection, and intimidate these vulnerable users. Enforcement of law at this intersection is rare. NPS should provide clear signage and lane markings for motor vehicles coming off of the GW Parkway and 110. The intersection should be realigned to eliminate the “slip lane” feel for motor vehicles turning right onto Memorial Drive. The crosswalk should be raised to emphasize the safety of pedestrians and bicyclists using the crosswalk, and further encourage drivers to stop, as required, at this intersection.
Memorial Drive in total deserves a road diet. Its width encourages motor vehicles to travel at a dangerously high rate of speed and makes crossing intimidating for pedestrians. Instead, NPS should install protected bike lanes on either side of the roadway, reducing the travel lanes for motor vehicles to one lane in each direction. NPS should consider pedestrian refuges, possible as part of the barrier between the protect bike lanes and travel lanes (note that medians have been found to increase motor vehicle travel speeds).
Many bicyclists travel through this area, preferring to travel on the roadway on Memorial Drive and to travel on the sidepath along Memorial Bridge (in no small part because of the high speed of travel and aggressive driving on the Bridge itself, due certainly, in part, to the lack of enforcement of traffic laws). Currently, the transition between the roadway and the sidepath is confusing for those new to the traffic pattern. During the design process, NPS should consult with bicyclists to estimate the preferred routes, and provide safe transitions for bicyclists between the roadway and the sidepaths where appropriate.
Additionally, the MUPs in this area are far too narrow (per Shared Use Path Level of Service (http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/publications…pedbike/05138/) and induce conflict between pedestrians and cyclists. In most locations in the study area, ample space exists to widen the paths. In other places, NPS should prioritize changes that create sufficient space for the pedestrians and bicyclists. Specifically, as the Mount Vernon Trail travels under the Memorial Bridge, the trail is inexcusably narrow, with a small barrier between vulnerable users and motor vehicles traveling at high speed. This area is certainly difficult for NPS to manage, but the current configuration is dangerous and discourages pedestrians and cyclists – particularly families wishing to travel with their children – from using this National Park.
Proper trail connections must be provided for all of the routes that pedestrians and bicyclists travel and all trail connections must be adequately signed. In particular, a safe, paved connection should be provided from the north-side or upstream bridge path to the Mount Vernon Trail. The current configuration requires a pedestrians and bicyclists to travel more than a mile out of their way, which is a long distance for many bicyclists and particularly pedestrians. Moreover, the proper route is not signed, so those unfamiliar with the area do not know the intended path to travel.
NPS should design this area to serve the needs of all who would like to enjoy this National Park. As such, NPS should integrate at least one Capital Bikeshare station in this area, preferably near the Metro station. Additionally, whenever NPS designs infrastructure for bicyclists, the design vehicle should be a cargo bike with a longer wheel based. Family biking is becoming increasingly common in this area, and bicycle infrastructure must accommodate all types of bicycles, including long-tails, box bikes, trail-a-bikes and bike trailers.
Finally, NPS should recognize that GW Parkway itself is no longer functioning as a scenic byway. If the character of the Parkway intended to be a memorial or a true park experience, then traffic must be calmed and bicyclists should be allowed to use the roadway. If the NPS is willing to recognize that the nature of Parkway is a high-speed commuter route, then NPS should make the Parkway safe for such travel: proper exits and entrances should be provided, curves should be mitigated for the actual speed of travel. Either way, wayfinding and warning signage must be improved and the spaghetti of lanes should be simplified with unneeded connections removed.

[Emm]

Thanks dasgeh! I submitted an edited/personalized version of what you have. It covered all the points I wanted to cover so I feel no shame stealing most of your work

[dasgeh]

@Emm 95710 wrote:

Thanks dasgeh! I submitted an edited/personalized version of what you have. It covered all the points I wanted to cover so I feel no shame stealing most of your work

You are very welcome. Thanks for commenting.

As someone who has to had to go through these sorts of comments, submitting edited versions of the same thing (even if there’s not a lot of editing, as long as the editing is obvious from the beginning) is a great way to amplify points.

[bobco85]

Thanks chris_s and dasgeh, I almost completely forgot to create and submit my comments!

This is what I wrote:

I am happy to see that the NPS is looking towards improvements for the area around Memorial Circle, the George Washington Memorial Parkway, and the Mount Vernon Trail. I have concerns about the future of this area, especially in its more recent usage as a commuter route instead of its original purpose as a “park” way. As a mostly cyclist/pedestrian who has sometimes driven through this area, I look forward to any and all improvements that can increase safety for everyone. I have suggestions, though, on how the goal of safety can be achieved.

Looking at the use of the George Washington Memorial Parkway during rush hour, one would conclude it to be a highway rather than a “park” way. There is a rather high capacity of traffic using the route, sometimes at rather high speeds, and combined with the many pedestrian crossings, exit ramps, and lane merges, the situation inevitably leads to numerous accidents.

The project area should have all speed limits lowered to 25 mph to give drivers time to safely decide where they need to go and for merging. This will also make it safer for pedestrians/cyclists at the many crossings. If the road is to continue to be used as a commuter artery as what seems likely, the way-finding for drivers must be improved with larger and clearer signs.

Trying to navigate the area as a pedestrian/cyclist brings with it a necessity to cross the somewhat dangerous GW Parkway. While some improvements like narrowing the road to one lane at the exit ramp just south of Memorial Circle for northbound drivers heading from Washington Blvd to the GW Parkway have increased the safety felt in crossing, the other crossings need improvements as well.

The project area should incorporate the results of last year’s pilot project using pedestrian-activated flashing yellow lights because they worked remarkably well in my experience. When activating these flashing lights, traffic would slow down and stop for me to cross, which made me feel very safe. These should be used in the more trafficked crossings on both the north and south sides of Memorial Circle. Way-finding signs could be placed on both sides of each crossing to help pedestrians/cyclists navigate to their desired destinations towards Memorial Bridge, Arlington National Cemetery, the Pentagon, Washington DC, Rosslyn, and Alexandria.

The Mount Vernon Trail should be widened as it passes under Memorial Bridge. By making the GW Parkway speed limit lower at 25 mph, using some of the road space to widen the trail should be easier because drivers will not need as much room when passing under the bridge.

Lastly, the future of the George Washington Memorial Parkway rests on how the NPS views the roadway. Is it a parkway where drivers can access the many beautiful, historical, and serene areas along the Potomac River at their leisure? Or is it a commuter highway meant to carry large numbers of drivers at higher speeds because the infrastructure for entering DC is sorely lacking? I would hope that the NPS skews more toward it being a parkway meant for recreation and leisure, or else it could end up a disgustingly polluted and traffic-jammed blight along the beautiful Potomac River.

Thank you for taking time to allow for public comment, and I hope you incorporate some of my suggestions into the future plans of this historically important area.

[PotomacCyclist]

Done, even though I rarely ride over there these days. I really dislike riding along the trails and the dangerous road crossings. It’s easy enough for me to take the 14th St. Bridge and avoid those road crossings. I think I’ve only ridden near Memorial Circle once or twice this year, whereas I continue to ride on the 14th St. Bridge (George Mason Bridge) frequently.

My comment:

Thank you for this effort to improve the safety of Memorial Circle.
As others have noted, the roads should be redesigned to discourage high-speed driving. The GW Memorial Parkway should be a parkway, not an Indy car racetrack.

If at all possible, the Mt. Vernon Trail and other trail crossings of various roads and on-ramps should be converted into grade-separated crossings. While the change to the trail crossing of Washington Blvd. just to the south of Memorial Bridge was welcome, it is only a start.

The Washington Blvd. lanes that run under Memorial Bridge could be removed completely. That would eliminate two trail/road crossings in the area.

The sidewalks around the Circle absolutely need to be improved in design and routing. Signage needs to be put in place to help visitors navigate the area safely. Tens of thousands of tourists visit Arlington Cemetery and the Lincoln Memorial. Many are unfamiliar with the road, trail and sidewalk configuration. I’ve seen families run across the traffic lanes in the circle when trying to move between the Cemetery and Memorial Bridge, because they cannot easily figure out where they can walk. That area should not be so dangerous and hostile to pedestrians, runners and cyclists. It is a park and a place of contemplation. It should not be a raceway.

[PotomacCyclist]

It may be unrealistic to expect NPS to build bike bridges there, but they asked for public input. I figure, why not go big? Even if they don’t build any bridges or remove car lanes, maybe such comments shake up their thinking. Even if it doesn’t, I tried.

[Author]

Posts