Proposed Capital Bikeshare Locations opposed by Bluemont Civic Association – vote

[83b]

Sorry to hear that. Their objections sound very similar to the ones raised by my neighbors to get the Lincoln Park bikeshare station in DC moved to the other side of the park at the outset of the program.

Those same neighbors are now semi-frequent bikeshare riders.

[rcannon100]

I have a suggestion of where they could put the station if that neighborhood does not want it

[Steve O]

rcannon100;114061 wrote:

i have a suggestion of where they could put the station

ftfy

[bobco85]

From my knowledge of the Bluemont Civic Association, they are pretty bike-friendly (they pushed for the bike lane reconfiguration for Wilson Blvd between Bluemont Park and Emerson St that will occur when it is resurfaced) but are EXTREMELY PROTECTIVE of the Bluemont Junction Trail green space. That said, I think they could easily use one of the bulbed dead-ends (like on Illinois St) for the bikeshare station without interfering with the park itself.

For the Harrison St/Fairfax Dr bikeshare station, I agree with 2 points: Westover Park would be good place for a station, and southbound cars speed down the hill on Harrison St (the traffic calming measures haven’t worked). The safety fears for children due to any bikeshare users will be minimal compared to the current vehicular danger.

I hope both of these stations get built so that the bikeshare network can further expand to the west.

[jrenaut]

It’s really sad when the argument is “we can’t put bikes there because the drivers won’t stop speeding”.

[Kolohe]

Bluemont Civic association hated the W&OD connection that went between Carlin Springs Road and Wilson Blvd too.

They’re implicitly racist for criticizing the proposed location near St. Ann’s when (off the top of my head) Drew, Gunston, and TJ, have bike share stations adjacent to their property. There proposal for relocation it down to Bon Air puts it in the next neighborhood over. So they literally don’t want any bikeshare stations in their neighborhood. (as is revealed by the ‘single family’ characterization, and their history with the Soviet Safeway). (though to be fair, that location could use one too).

To also be fair, now that Bikeshare is better at balancing the George Mason/Wilson station than it was during the first year or so, there isn’t as big of a need for a station between Kensington and that intersection. I would like to see one closer to the Caboose though, because that’s about the limit of a casual ride from Arlington Mill on Cabi. (and a non-casual ride would be able to reach to the Caboose from Barcroft park (i.e George Mason), or possibly even the Shirlington W&OD endpoint). In any case, there’s a rather visible N-S gap at the current western edge of the system ivo Arlington Forest and Glencarlyn.

[baiskeli]

@Kolohe 114073 wrote:

They’re implicitly racist for criticizing the proposed location near St. Ann’s when (off the top of my head) Drew, Gunston, and TJ, have bike share stations adjacent to their property.

That comment is way way over the top.

There proposal for relocation it down to Bon Air puts it in the next neighborhood over. So they literally don’t want any bikeshare stations in their neighborhood.

The proposed location is right on the border of Bluemont. And it doesn’t mean they want no stations in the neighborhood, just not the two proposed.

I would like to see a station at the end of the trail, in Bluemont Park, which is a heavy destination with parking problems on weekends, but I’ve heard the power lines would interfere with the radio signals. That might be a problem at the suggested Westover-Bon Air Parks location too.

[baiskeli]

@bobco85 114067 wrote:

From my knowledge of the Bluemont Civic Association, they are pretty bike-friendly (they pushed for the bike lane reconfiguration for Wilson Blvd between Bluemont Park and Emerson St that will occur when it is resurfaced) but are EXTREMELY PROTECTIVE of the Bluemont Junction Trail green space.

Well, until CaBi created this dilemma, being bike-friendly and protective of the BJT green space were the same thing.

That said, I think they could easily use one of the bulbed dead-ends (like on Illinois St) for the bikeshare station without interfering with the park itself.

Yes, like here:

https://www.google.com/maps/@38.8729,-77.125266,3a,75y,125.65h,74.98t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1shii5wvmp9-o0Wy83ztdolw!2e0

I hope both of these stations get built so that the bikeshare network can further expand to the west.

Me too. And maybe there’s somewhere closer to Wilson they can do once the bike lanes are painted.

[Kolohe]

@baiskeli 114077 wrote:

The proposed location is right on the border of Bluemont. And it doesn’t mean they want no stations in the neighborhood, just not the two proposed.[/quote]

The only two stations annotated in the Bluemont neighborhood on the bikeshare expansion map are the two stations they oppose. They didn’t even pretend to make an alternative to the trail one.

Their stated reason to oppose the stations are
1) because of the single family nature of the neighborhood – which is all of Bluemont. (except for the slice on the east side of George Mason – which already has a bikeshare station – two if you count the one up by the old Blue Goose).
2) because of roads with ‘heavy residential traffic’ – with traffic calming devices! – which again, is all of bluemont.
3) because it would destroy our precious greenspace on the Bluemont trail.

So, no bikeshare near single family detached, no bikeshare near roads, no bikeshare near trails.

Clearly, they don’t want bikeshare, despite their “oh, but we SO wanted it in our conservation plan”.

[baiskeli]

@Kolohe 114083 wrote:

The only two stations annotated in the Bluemont neighborhood on the bikeshare expansion map are the two stations they oppose.

Well, yeah, they aren’t going to oppose (or support, or otherwise comment on) stations that aren’t in their neighborhood.

Their stated reason to oppose the stations are
1) because of the single family nature of the neighborhood – which is all of Bluemont. (except for the slice on the east side of George Mason – which already has a bikeshare station – two if you count the one up by the old Blue Goose).

No, the “close proximity” to homes, not just the general nature of the neighborhood.

2) because of roads with ‘heavy residential traffic’ – with traffic calming devices! – which again, is all of bluemont.

No, it’s not. Harrison is a major thoroughfare, despite being narrow, because it has a bridge over I-66 and connects to Lee Highway. It’s a legitimate concern, especially at that particular spot.

3) because it would destroy our precious greenspace on the Bluemont trail.

As I mentioned above in another comment, before CaBi, protecting the greenspace and supporting cycling were the same thing.

So, no bikeshare near single family detached, no bikeshare near roads, no bikeshare near trails.

They didn’t say that either. They were referring to those particular locations.

Clearly, they don’t want bikeshare, despite their “oh, but we SO wanted it in our conservation plan”.

I should tell you now that I helped write that original plan as a resident of the neighborhood who has lived directly on the Bluemont Trail for 20 years and who uses Harrison Street frequently. I wasn’t at the meeting where these resolutions were adopted, I haven’t been active in BCA in a long time, and I don’t always agree with what BCA does lately (the Safeway thing was pretty pathetic), but I am very familiar with the exact locations involved, and I can assure you that, while everyone is different, it’s quite possible they are not simply rooted in flat-out opposition to Bikeshare. At least you didn’t try to defend that racism comment though.

I think you should take the time to listen to neighborhood concerns when advocated bike infrastructure instead of dismissing them, let alone trying to assign motives to them you can’t possibly know. You’ll get better results.

[dasgeh]

Yes, this is troubling, especially the references to SFHs. Don’t they realize that they’re getting basically free loaner bikes for their guests, which all the sudden makes it possible for their guests to easily bike up/over to Metro/Ballston/Westover/all the fun stuff that will get their guests off of their couches and out of their hair.

We heard some grumbling in Cherrydale at first, too, but everyone’s pretty happy about it now.

[jrenaut]

@dasgeh 114087 wrote:

We heard some grumbling in Cherrydale at first, too, but everyone’s pretty happy about it now.

Pretty sure this has consistently been the way it goes. Announcement -> the sky is falling -> oh wait this is kind of nice.

[baiskeli]

“The Bluemont Civic Association (BCA) welcomes the interest expressed by Capital Bikeshare and Arlington County in locating additional Bikeshare stations within Bluemont and notes that Bluemont residents recently supported such an expansion in its Neighborhood Conservation Plan.”

Come on, guys. It’s possible to both support BikeShare in general yet oppose a specific location for a station.

[DismalScientist]

Why doesn’t anyone propose moving the Harrison St. station to the cul-de-sac on Frederick on the Custis trail?

[dasgeh]

@baiskeli 114085 wrote:

No, it’s not. Harrison is a major thoroughfare, despite being narrow, because it has a bridge over I-66 and connects to Lee Highway. It’s a legitimate concern, especially at that particular spot.

Harrison is a great connection for cycling — it’s an alternative to George Mason and not TOO hilly. We take it ALL THE TIME to get to the Lee Harrison shops. Yes, we see cars speed, and cars roll through stop signs. But you know what I see more often? Speeding cars slow down when they see us on a bike. Cars come to a complete and full stop and wait longer than they have to for us to go by. Having people on bikes in your neighborhood is a great traffic calming measure in and of itself.

Honestly, I get that CaBi doesn’t always get the initial locations right. I can understand if there’s a better location than what’s been proposed. The problem is these resolutions don’t leave logic solutions open. If they really worry about Harrison St, why not just on Fairfax, but at the same corner? Why not something that says “please don’t put the stations in the middle of greenspace, but put them at the end of a dead-end street” — presumably that’s what CaBi would want to do to allow rebalancing, and presumably the neighborhood still wants CaBi to put down new concrete to preserve parking/the ability to turn around at the dead ends.

These locations smack of NIMBYism. Hopefully, someone has alerted the neighboring businesses to how the neighborhood is trying to screw them.

[Author]

Posts