Mount Vernon Trail Safety Improvement Project – Theodore Roosevelt Island Parking Lot

[Steve]

@lordofthemark 82028 wrote:

not to go too far off topic, but could we have a sticky or something with geographic nicknames explained, like trollheim? I know we have a forum dictionary but its mostly about things cyclists and others do, not places.

I like the idea! For this instance, in case it is not know, the trollheim refers to the long wooden boardwalk section of the MVT just south of Roosevelt Island. Though between drivers piloting their cars off the GWMP into it and the Roosevelt Bridge falling on it, the trollheim might not be there for much longer….

[thucydides]

NPS is surely shy on money so here is a cost-free solution to the “problem” of the TR parking lot. I’ll describe this from the perspective of someone heading into Virginia. Get rid of the barriers that prevent cyclists from entering the parking lot next to the island bridge. Don’t just allow but encourage or even require cyclists to ride in the lot until the curb-cut next to the bridge over the GWMP. I’ve ridden through there twice a day for years. The very few times I’ve ever faced problems with cars was due to cars failing to yield when I was on the trail crossing the parking lot (i.e., the crossing that connects the two 90 degree turns). In contrast I’ve had — I don’t know — hundreds of situations where being forced to take the trail put me in some sort of potential collision with pedestrians (frequent) or cyclists (rare and always at one of the 90 degree turns). I’ve never had an actual collision there but the potential is there and pretty much always is the consequence of forcing bikes onto a poorly designed section of trail. But NPS doesn’t need to spend millions to fix it. They just need to recognize that having bikes in the lot is a feature not a bug (or a viable workaround to the bug).

[Geoff]

@lordofthemark 82028 wrote:

not to go too far off topic, but could we have a sticky or something with geographic nicknames explained, like trollheim? I know we have a forum dictionary but its mostly about things cyclists and others do, not places.

I’ve been mulling this over for some time but am unlikely to do anything with it. Maybe a group effort could get off the ground.

The Custis seems to have most of the interesting names though I’m not sure how well accepted they are. Some that come to mind:
The Rosslyn Luge: the long east-bound downhill into Rosslyn, with the wall to your right.
The Moguls: the stretch just west of the Luge with the wave-like bumps
Intersection of Doom: Lynn and US29 (What is that, Lee?) in Rosslyn
Bridge to Nowhere: haven’t figured this one out
Tunnel of Love: Haven’t figured this one out
Sister Hills: a pair of short, steep hills at… sorry, need help with a landmark…

It might also be fun to do a map, maybe with Google Maps or Ride with GPS, marking these.

[DismalScientist]

@Geoff 82036 wrote:

Bridge to Nowhere: haven’t figured this one out

The Bridge to Nowhere is the pedestrian bridge over 66 at the top of the hill-like structure in the Moguls.

The Twin Sisters are the hill climbing to the bridge over the off-ramp at Glebe Road.

Is the Tunnel of Love the underpass under 66 at Westover Park? Ewww….

[cvcalhoun]

The Bridge to Nowhere is to be distinguished from the Bridge Over Nothing, which is located on the Capital Crescent Trail just north of the Dalecarlia Tunnel. Apparently “Bridge Over Water Treatment Plant” didn’t sound all that appealing.

@DismalScientist 82045 wrote:

The Bridge to Nowhere is the pedestrian bridge over 66 at the top of the hill-like structure in the Moguls.

The Twin Sisters are the hill climbing to the bridge over the off-ramp at Glebe Road.

Is the Tunnel of Love the underpass under 66 at Westover Park? Ewww….

[baiskeli]

@thucydides 82032 wrote:

NPS is surely shy on money so here is a cost-free solution to the “problem” of the TR parking lot. I’ll describe this from the perspective of someone heading into Virginia. Get rid of the barriers that prevent cyclists from entering the parking lot next to the island bridge. Don’t just allow but encourage or even require cyclists to ride in the lot until the curb-cut next to the bridge over the GWMP. I’ve ridden through there twice a day for years. The very few times I’ve ever faced problems with cars was due to cars failing to yield when I was on the trail crossing the parking lot (i.e., the crossing that connects the two 90 degree turns). In contrast I’ve had — I don’t know — hundreds of situations where being forced to take the trail put me in some sort of potential collision with pedestrians (frequent) or cyclists (rare and always at one of the 90 degree turns). I’ve never had an actual collision there but the potential is there and pretty much always is the consequence of forcing bikes onto a poorly designed section of trail. But NPS doesn’t need to spend millions to fix it. They just need to recognize that having bikes in the lot is a feature not a bug (or a viable workaround to the bug).

Whatever they do, they should try to encourage consistency. I find that when I take the trail, the potential conflicts are with other cyclists taking the lot. Sometimes the sight lines and confusion about intentions and right-of-way when someone is entering or leaving the trail makes things dicey.

[DismalScientist]

The reason I take the lot is that the 90 degree turns suck. This area doesn’t seem to have any more pedestrians than the rest of the MVT, so I don’t see those conflicts as particularly problematic. Widening the trail, with or without pedestrian separation, and having the trail cross the lot at shallower angles and with smoother turns seems to be the appropriate response given that the NPS is loathe to encourage riding in the lot.

[dasgeh]

@DismalScientist 82052 wrote:

The reason I take the lot is that the 90 degree turns suck. This area doesn’t seem to have any more pedestrians than the rest of the MVT, so I don’t see those conflicts as particularly problematic. Widening the trail, with or without pedestrian separation, and having the trail cross the lot at shallower angles and with smoother turns seems to be the appropriate response given that the NPS is loathe to encourage riding in the lot.

Just to be clear: NPS isn’t proposing widening the entire trail. They’re proposing widening the few parts <9' to 9'. In most cases, that's an entire 1 extra foot. Not better than the lot.

[thucydides]

This is an aside but the area has a second bridge to nowhere with a funnyish (as in groan worthy) back story. (At least it’s the story I’ve been told by more than one former Fairfax official.) On the beltway just north of the Braddock road (alongside Wakefield Park) is a bridge to nowhere. Specifically it connects Wakefield park on the westside of 495 with a bunch of apartments on the eastside of 495. (So at least it doesn’t deadend like the one over 66.) The story is that VDOT was doing some work on 495 and needed to put up a sign. So they said to Fairfax County, “Hey would you like a bike/pedestrian crossing to hold our sign?” “Why not,” was the reply. So they got a crossing. This nicely sums up the randomness of Fairfax’s past (if not present) approach to cycling infrastructure. In truth they could potentially integrate this bridge into something useful. 495 is after all a significant barrier. But they really haven’t. To top it all off, after construction of the HOT stuff VDOT removed the signs from the bridge. Here are pics of it before that happened:

[ATTACH=CONFIG]5163[/ATTACH]

[ATTACH=CONFIG]5164[/ATTACH]

[ShawnoftheDread]

How is that a bridge to nowhere? It connects Wakefield Park and its trails to the neighborhoods inside the beltway. Before LRT and Braddock got new side paths it was the best way to cross the beltway in that area.

[Drewdane]

lordofthemark;82028 wrote:

not to go too far off topic, but could we have a sticky or something with geographic nicknames explained, like trollheim? I know we have a forum dictionary but its mostly about things cyclists and others do, not places.

thank you!!!

[Drewdane]

@thucydides 82032 wrote:

NPS is surely shy on money so here is a cost-free solution to the “problem” of the TR parking lot. I’ll describe this from the perspective of someone heading into Virginia. Get rid of the barriers that prevent cyclists from entering the parking lot next to the island bridge. Don’t just allow but encourage or even require cyclists to ride in the lot until the curb-cut next to the bridge over the GWMP. I’ve ridden through there twice a day for years. The very few times I’ve ever faced problems with cars was due to cars failing to yield when I was on the trail crossing the parking lot (i.e., the crossing that connects the two 90 degree turns). In contrast I’ve had — I don’t know — hundreds of situations where being forced to take the trail put me in some sort of potential collision with pedestrians (frequent) or cyclists (rare and always at one of the 90 degree turns). I’ve never had an actual collision there but the potential is there and pretty much always is the consequence of forcing bikes onto a poorly designed section of trail. But NPS doesn’t need to spend millions to fix it. They just need to recognize that having bikes in the lot is a feature not a bug (or a viable workaround to the bug).

^^^ This!

[americancyclo]

@ShawnoftheDread 82062 wrote:

How is that a bridge to nowhere? It connects Wakefield Park and its trails to the neighborhoods inside the beltway. Before LRT and Braddock got new side paths it was the best way to cross the beltway in that area.

This is the one that connects to Americana Rd, right? That’s a fun bridge and connects to the FFX CCT, right?

[ShawnoftheDread]

@americancyclo 82093 wrote:

This is the one that connects to Americana Rd, right? That’s a fun bridge and connects to the FFX CCT, right?

Yes. It’s quite useful. Even for non-bikers, it gives the people living in the apartments around Americana and Heritage direct access to Wakefield and Audrey Moore Rec Center.

[thucydides]

Perhaps bridge to nowhere is the wrong descriptor as it has developed into something useful. “Ad hoc” bridge perhaps because it was there not put there with the intent of actually doing anything with it. Just putting stuff up in an ad hoc way is one way you get a completely disjointed system where things don’t connect logically and efficiently. Fairfax in other words. In this particular case the bridge ended up being rather useful, though not nearly as useful as it could be.

[Author]

Posts