[chris_s]

From McCauliffe’s Transportation Policy Page: “Giving commuter options. We should focus on the investments that give Virginians choices about how they want to get around: transit systems, walking, biking, and a well maintained and uncongested system of roads.”

Also of interest to anyone who has had to deal with VDOT on a cycling issue: “Separate planning from delivery. Project selection and long term planning should be a collaboration among transportation experts, Virginia’s elected leaders, and local and regional leaders. Transportation planning in Virginia needs to support local communities as well as local, regional and statewide economic growth. VDOT must be a part of that process, but may not be best suited to understanding local land use or broad economic trends. VDOT should be in the business of managing maintenance and construction of transportation infrastructure, not setting the Commonwealth’s agenda. “

[chris_s]

@dasgeh 65903 wrote:

I’m concerned about the loss of Southgate Road as a gentler alternative to the Pike, in terms of both traffic and hills. What exactly is the new plan? Will it force all bikes up the steep hill to the entrance to the AF Memorial?

Southgate won’t go away without a land swap taking place. The Pike Street Space standards call for a 10′ trail on the north side of Columbia Pike and also bike lanes through there (which is not a crazy idea since the Streetcar will run in the median lanes in that stretch). Who knows whether Arlington will be able to extract enough right-of-way in the land deal to accommodate all of that width though. I also have no idea how steep the grade will end up on a realigned Columbia Pike. I doubt it will be steeper than the current Columbia Pike grade (streetcars can only handle so much) but I have no idea how much (if any) less steep it would be.

@dasgeh 65903 wrote:

While we’re negotiating with DOD, are we discussing access to Fort Myer and ANC? If not, we’re losing an opportunity to discuss an important connection in Arlington’s bike network.

I don’t know, but I doubt it; there are already a ton of moving parts in that negotiation.

[chris_s]

@bobco85 65873 wrote:

Have they made any progress with the golf course connection? I thought the idea of building an escarpment for a trail was thoroughly rejected and opposed by the golf course membership, with some members even going so far as to threaten litigation.

The county has the easement and the project is still part of the Master Transportation Plan. The only hold-up is time and money (and given the grade change, it likely won’t be a cheap project). There is also still some question as to whether this will be built just for bike-ped, or built big enough that it can be used for emergency access to the neighborhood.

The County will be updating their Capital Improvement Plan this Spring. I firmly believe that getting this project into the plan should be a top priority for Arlington Cyclists. We’ll want allies who also want that connection. I don’t suppose anybody here lives in the Arlington View Neighborhood? Any Arlington Paramedics or Firefighters by any chance?

Right now we haven’t even done enough design work to know what it’ll cost to build it.

[chris_s]

@mstone 65101 wrote:

it would be nice if the stairs had one of those bike ramps; walking a bike around those zig zags looks horrible.

I believe it will.

[chris_s]

@Guus 66050 wrote:

Makes me pretty nervous about using that intersection again, especially since the bike lane is interrupted in a strange way when driving next to Washington-Lee. I suppose it is to make room for the car turn-lane but it makes for a dangerous bike ride since you’re forced into accelerating traffic all of a sudden.

I DESPISE that sharrow. Quincy is so nice otherwise.

[chris_s]

@PotomacCyclist 65868 wrote:

I’m still waiting to see if DOD/Arlington will get the land transfer done at Southgate Rd./former Navy Annex. Then Arlington or DOD could improve the terrible sidewalk along the eastern section of Columbia Pike, from Washington Blvd. to Joyce St.

My understanding is that negotiations are continuing and actually going fairly well. The County Board put the Pike East End realignment project into the queue for the new regional transportation money, so somebody out there is feeling at least somewhat confident about a deal being made.

The description as given in the board report:

Columbia Pike Multimodal – East End Realignment and Washington Boulevard
Interchange Modification – $10,000,000 requested

This project includes realignment of the east end of Columbia Pike from South Orme
Street through the intersection of South Joyce Street to the easternmost Washington
Boulevard interchange. The project will relocate and realign the roadway south of its
existing location, eliminating existing s-curves and enhancing existing pedestrian
facilities to improve safety and increase capacity.

The project also includes modification of the easternmost Washington Boulevard
interchange at Columbia Pike; to include construction of at least one signalized
intersection and elimination of two ramps, reducing the number of conflict points and
weaving movements on Washington Boulevard to improve safety and increase capacity.
All movements will be provided for with the interchange modifications.

The project is currently in the preliminary engineering phase. The proposed $10,000,000
will advance implementation of the planned improvements.

[chris_s]

@dasgeh 64344 wrote:

I really need to find a local bike shop that stocks WeeHoos and get them to sponsor. That’s at least the 2nd sold by KM-A. I’m thinking sponsorship would entail snacks at the start / finish of each ride, more swag and maybe even bike shop discounts…

My Weehoo is en route as well.

[chris_s]

@cyclingfool 64623 wrote:

From the looks of it, that serpentine seems more like a test of bike handling skills than a reasonable accommodation for cyclists, but I’ll withhold judgement until I see it completed and/or try to ride it myself.

It’s been a few pages, so just to reiterate – this is the cheap-o temporary connection that Alexandria is requiring the townhouse developer to build in addition to tearing down the bridge. Arlington is in the process of designing a better, permanent, bike-friendly connection.

[chris_s]

@dasgeh 64239 wrote:

B: Is Long Bridge Drive too much of a mess? Looking at google maps, there seem to be paths through Long Bridge Park — could we take the eastern-most path from Crystal Drive to where it reconnects with LB Dr neat the storage place? I haven’t reconned (or ever been there) – are there curb cuts and such?

You can definitely roll in from the south, the question is really can you get back out again on the north end effectively. There are a lot of grade changes on the site and so a lot of those paths have pesky things like stairs. Might be possible. From what I’ve heard and seen, construction on Long Bridge Drive has come a long way, but I haven’t been down there recently enough to know if it has progressed to the point that you’d want to take kids down it.

[chris_s]

It was great seeing everybody on Sunday! Thanks again to dasgeh for all of your hard work!

I say we should try to work a cul-de-sac into every ride – it was awesome getting to ride past everybody

[chris_s]

Just another point to make as far as downhill bike lanes vs sharrows – this area of King often backs up pretty bad in the downhill direction (sometimes over half the distance to Janney’s Ln). A downhill bike lanes would be extremely useful for filtering to the front in those situations.

@bobco85 63757 wrote:

The choice between using a wider lane with sharrows and using a separate bike lane for the downhill portion is really racking my brain right now, but i think I’m leaning more toward the use of sharrows. I would prefer sharrows with the use of “Cyclists may use full lane” signs (even though we shouldn’t have to use the signs at all, but that’s a different story) because they give drivers a clear indication that the road is a bicycle route and therefore cyclists will be present. Caveat: because there is no parking (we’re only talking downhill here) the sharrows will likely be placed close to the gutter like on Walter Reed Dr between Four Mile Run and Route 7.

The obstacle to this being used by all types of cyclists is that I think most people perceive separate bike lanes as much safer than sharrows. Because of that, I would expect more cyclists to use this route if bike lanes were there, especially since Janneys Lane has bike lanes, and I would expect them to install bike lanes for the downhill portion as a result.

[chris_s]

Awesome – thanks for the update!

[chris_s]

@dasgeh 63498 wrote:

Chris, after the recon, I don’t want to go through the park — there are sharp turns in the path in the park, and the real killer – there are no curb cuts where the path comes out of the park near the basketball courts.

I’ll see if I can get this fixed as part of our next NC project in the park (which should be coming up for final design shortly).

[chris_s]

@NicDiesel 63137 wrote:

Is there a reason most kids I see in the front of bikes like that don’t have eye protection? I don’t have any kids so I’m genuinely curious if there’s a reason for that. I mean, I understand that kids that age would probably just throw them off or not be able to keep them on, but it just makes me terrified when I see that. .

Because the danger from them chucking their eye protection into the spokes of the front wheel is greater than the danger that they’ll get something in their eye.

[chris_s]

Gold did.

[Author]

Posts