More Fun on the W & OD

[DismalScientist]

@rcannon100 90932 wrote:

Well, can we at least install these things on the bike paths??? I think they might be effective at stopping some of the cars.

It’ll do wonders on barefoot joggers as well…

[americancyclo]

just remember that half of the people out there are dumber than average.

I agree with dasgeh’ suggestion that there should be some large print warning that the areas are not accessible to cars when registering for them on the website, and that cars are not tolerated on the trail. anyone caught should be charged a $500 fine to the card they used for reserving the space.

[cyclingfool]

@Steve 90933 wrote:

It nearly absolves the driver from the fact that they drove up a curb cut, or are on a ten foot wide path with a solid stripe down the middle.

The solid stripe is there to help drivers stay centered on the narrow path so as not to put a wheel off in the grass… duh! :rolleyes:

[Vicegrip]

I don’t care why. I just want to keep cars off the paths without undue machinations

Paint warning stripes but block access to cars. I am too old and grumpy to think anything less will stop self entitled and clueless people Again this is not high traffic high speed area I understand bollards are an unwanted hazard that cause more harm than good. I also understand that is not universal and in some places they are simple, long lasting and efictive without undue risk.

[OneEighth]

Seems like the sort of thing one pays the authorities to enforce.
Couple rounds of ticket-giving on the weekends and the word will get out. Might even result in a few DUIs. Bonus.

[Steve O]

@dasgeh 90904 wrote:

The issue is that there are a number of blind corners and cyclists traveling at non walking speeds. I slow down in those corners so I could avoid an oncoming bike or ped, but if a car is in front of me, I’d need to stop, and I don’t slow down that much. .

The trail is already used by vehicles on a regular basis. My guess is that authorized vehicles outnumber unauthorized by at least 100:1. So caution is required on these blind corners anyway. As consular points out, it would be helpful if they had warnings of some kind if sight lines are short.

[bobco85]

Here’s some additional information on the rules and regulations for Bon Air Park: http://parks.arlingtonva.us/locations/bon-air-park/

From the reservation sheet:

There is no guaranteed parking and all cars must be parked in designated areas.

From the Arlington County Park Rules & Regulations page: http://parks.arlingtonva.us/arlington-county-park-rules-regulations/

(under Park/Facilities Use Rules/Regulations)

Driving, riding, or parking any bicycle, motorcycle or motor vehicle shall be limited to areas designated for such use.

Now, if I had my way, the access points would look more like these:

[ATTACH=CONFIG]6257[/ATTACH][ATTACH=CONFIG]6258[/ATTACH][ATTACH=CONFIG]6259[/ATTACH]

I think they are easier for drivers to understand.

[DismalScientist]

@bobco85 90955 wrote:

Now, if I had my way, the access points would look more like these:

[ATTACH=CONFIG]6257[/ATTACH][ATTACH=CONFIG]6258[/ATTACH][ATTACH=CONFIG]6259[/ATTACH]

And it would keep those damned pedestrians off the MUPs.:rolleyes:

[KLizotte]

@bobco85 90955 wrote:

Here’s some additional information on the rules and regulations for Bon Air Park: http://parks.arlingtonva.us/locations/bon-air-park/

From the reservation sheet:

From the Arlington County Park Rules & Regulations page: http://parks.arlingtonva.us/arlington-county-park-rules-regulations/

I think the reservation and parks info really needs to be updated to inform people that there is a fair distance from the parking lot to the shelter(s) since this is very important for mobility impaired folks and for people hauling a lot of stuff. Or else, change the infrastructure so that parking is closer.

[Steve O]

@bobco85 90955 wrote:

Now, if I had my way, the access points would look more like these:

[ATTACH=CONFIG]6257[/ATTACH][ATTACH=CONFIG]6258[/ATTACH][ATTACH=CONFIG]6259[/ATTACH]

I think they are easier for drivers to understand.

I like the “ONLY” although, of course, runners and walkers and rollerbladers are allowed, too. However, the idea is excellent. Just get rid of the bollard and it would be perfect.

[Tim Kelley]

@Steve O 90971 wrote:

I like the “ONLY” although, of course, runners and walkers and rollerbladers are allowed, too. However, the idea is excellent. Just get rid of the bollard and it would be perfect.

There is a Parks/DOT meeting coming up about trails and trail responsibilities. I’ll see if I can make this suggestion.

[bobco85]

@KLizotte 90959 wrote:

I think the reservation and parks info really needs to be updated to inform people that there is a fair distance from the parking lot to the shelter(s) since this is very important for mobility impaired folks and for people hauling a lot of stuff. Or else, change the infrastructure so that parking is closer.

I agree. There should be something on the reservation form explaining that there is no direct vehicular access to the shelter(s) and people should park either at Westover Park or Bon Air Park.

@Steve O 90971 wrote:

I like the “ONLY” although, of course, runners and walkers and rollerbladers are allowed, too. However, the idea is excellent. Just get rid of the bollard and it would be perfect.

Haha, at first, I thought, “AHA! I finally got Steve O to like a design with flexposts!” (Note: As stated long ago on this forum, I am anti-bollard, pro-flexpost, and differentiate the two because I think flexposts are far safer than bollards because of their flexibility, although I think their use should be restricted to potential vehicular access points and not random spots like on the ends of bridges or around blind corners)

Also, my reasoning for putting the “ONLY” on the designs is that it would be put on a road/parking lot to communicate to drivers that they should not be there whereas pedestrians would be using the sidewalk (and would rightfully ignore it).

[Vicegrip]

Rules for cars. If they don’t fit they must submit!

Cars on the trails in this area is for the most part not a danger. They are not speeding and running people off the trail they are creeping along. I my world it would be OK to slowly carefully drive a load of coolers and your gravitationally challenged aunt Hilda to the picnic area. In this world that would be abused into everyone driving in parking all over and all kinds of other over reaching stuff.

For me it is an irritating thing. We get scolded off the sidewalks honked at on the streets and it is not very Dirt of me but I don’t want to have to share with cars the one place that is intended to be car free

[dasgeh]

@Tim Kelley 90997 wrote:

There is a Parks/DOT meeting coming up about trails and trail responsibilities. I’ll see if I can make this suggestion.

Can you also talk to them about the reservation form and online info about the park? This isn’t theoretical – my coworkers booked the park based on the website, and were surprised they couldn’t drive up to it. They would have brought different stuff had they known.

@Vicegrip 91004 wrote:

Cars on the trails in this area is for the most part not a danger. They are not speeding and running people off the trail they are creeping along. I my world it would be OK to slowly carefully drive a load of coolers and your gravitationally challenged aunt Hilda to the picnic area. In this world that would be abused into everyone driving in parking all over and all kinds of other over reaching stuff.

Have you been to this area? I see your point in some places, but in order to get to the picnic shelter we’re talking about, you have to go around blind corners, most of them involving a hill (so at least one direction is headed downhill). There are other dangers, such as walls and ravines, making it so there would be no bail option if you, e.g. came around a blind corner and encountered a car taking up the entire trail.

But actually, no, even in the most open and straight of places, if there’s a no-car trail, it needs to stay no car. As a parent of small but mobile toddlers, I cherish the times when we’re in a place that I can let the roam a little bit. They know to stay on their line and not get in others’ way (and we stay closer to them when they’re on busy parts of trails and near, e.g., blind corners), but in places where there’s not a lot of traffic, like right near this picnic shelter, I finally get to exhale and let them run and bike and move without having to worry about a thousand ton hunk of metal whose driver can’t see people that short literally killing them. So no, cars should never be allowed on trails.

[Steve O]

@bobco85 90998 wrote:

I think flexposts are far safer than bollards because of their flexibility…

“Safer” does not mean safe. Although a handlebar hit on a flexpost is far less likely to cause a crash, the base is still bolted to the ground and a wheel striking it is very likely to cause a crash. Also, as we’ve seen, the posts break off eventually, leaving just the hazardous, hard-to-see base. We don’t put telephone poles in the middle of streets for a reason–even if those telephone poles are made of styrofoam.

Bollards as a solution for preventing vehicles from entering trails needs to be an absolute, last-case, after-all-else-has-failed solution. I know of no examples in Arlington (or pretty much anywhere) in which this policy has been applied.

Note that the NVRPA removed bollards from almost all of the W&OD many years ago (see my reference here). They have stubbornly been installing and reinstalling them at Maple Avenue, but most other places along the trail are bollard free. This was a deliberate decision they made in the past based on the knowledge that the danger to cyclists from the rare car on the trail is far lower than the danger presented by the bollard itself.

I think they should also remove them from Maple Avenue. I don’t know how much they’ve spent reinstalling them every few months after they get broken (struck by cyclists who then crash I imagine), but by now they could have paid for a safe redesign that would serve everyone better and be permanent and not present a danger to trail users.

I think trail paint like this could do the trick:

[Author]

Posts