[dasgeh]

This virus is different in that the incubation period is 5-14 days — i.e. a person could have no symptoms for 5-14 days after exposure and could be spreading the virus during some or all of that time. Our testing has been virtually non-existent. So I don’t think we can rely on the ol’ “don’t come if you have symptoms” to stop the spread of this thing.

Also, when you’re working out, you’re sweating, your nose starts running, you may spit… Bodily fluids are prevalent.

Personally, I think solo bike rides are fine at this point. I think having a small set of “your people” that you are in contact with (as long as it’s a closed set – you are all only in contact with each other) is fine. But I think anything beyond that is putting people in danger.

[dasgeh]

We are protecting the vulnerable by staying completely isolated from everyone except the closed circle of those we live with unless absolutely necessary – the important part being that our circle is closed (we’re only hanging out with each other) and small. With all we’re hearing from Europe, I would hope that any group rides would be postponed.

[dasgeh]

@Dewey 198962 wrote:

Arlington County just refused an E-bikeshare operating license to a bikeshare company because their ebikes lack a speedo required under County regulation. Somebody please inform Lyft/Motivate their upcoming CaBi+ ebikes will need a speedo to operate in Arlington.

@dasgeh 199001 wrote:

I don’t think [the assertion that the speedometer requirement applies to bikeshare] is correct. The only requirement for a speedometer is in Article X of section 14 (scroll way down in the pdf of just word search), which only applies to a “Mirco-Mobility Businesss”, which is defined as:

[which] clearly doesn’t apply to private ownership and doesn’t seem to apply to CaBi.

[dasgeh]

@Dewey 198989 wrote:

Arlington County regulations require all ebikes to have a speedo – that includes bikeshare

I don’t think this is correct. The only requirement for a speedometer is in Article X of section 14 (scroll way down in the pdf of just word search), which only applies to a “Mirco-Mobility Businesss”, which is defined as:

“Micro-Mobility Business” means the entity providing Micro-Mobility Devices for-hire. These Businesses rely on the right-of-way to store Micro-Mobility Devices for customer access and use. Micro-Mobility Businesses shall not include regional multi-jurisdictional or County provided shared transportation services.

It clearly doesn’t apply to private ownership and doesn’t seem to apply to CaBi.

[dasgeh]

@zsionakides 198781 wrote:

Any taking requires reasonable compensation even if put in federal statute. In general the preference is going to be for negotiating a sale, vice having to go through litigation to get it. The condemnation basically locks Arlington into negotiating a deal or taking their chances in court.

This is similar to homes being taken by the State for a highway or other public project. A property owner can’t simply refuse a sale. They either negotiate or go to court and get a settled agreement, which may or may not be more favorable.

But this was exactly that negotiation. You stated before that the cycletrack should have been agreed to in an earlier agreement (sale). There was none. Arlington negotiated with the DoD to get the plan we are looking at.

[dasgeh]

Thanks for the update. Glad it turned out.

[dasgeh]

Thanks. It’s hard to be clear here, but that map definitely helps.

[dasgeh]

@arlcxrider 198748 wrote:

About 8 am today, south side of the circle, where the two lanes come off the GW Pkwy. Bicycle was wedged under the front bumper. Rider was up and alert, and exchanging information with the driver. No police on scene. Another cyclist had stopped, and the situation seemed under control, so I didn’t stick around.

Do you mean (1) the crossing of the 2 lanes (which has at times been narrowed to 1 lane bc construction) going to Memorial Bridge, (2) the crossing of the one lane connecting 27 to the GWMP (the crossing is just one lane but it used to be two and sometimes drivers still make it two); or (3) the crossing of the two lanes of the GWMP itself (close to the river)?

[dasgeh]

@zsionakides 198732 wrote:

The county had plenty of leverage in the land sale and didn’t use it initially. Considering DoD agree to the cycle track after the fact, I’m sure they would have agreed early on with little push back considering it’s a very small part of the overall costs. Instead Arlington had to come back and ask for the cycle track later. It’s Arlington’s money in terms of value for the land and not getting better value for it.

It’s the same issue with negotiating with ANCC. Arlington could have came out with a much bigger ask – say an easement for a path all the way around the course or allowing legal usage of the road through the club for cyclists which would have huge benefits – but they limited the ask to a small path.

There was no land sale to ANC — This is a taking by the federal government. My understanding is that the push came from staff — yes, we’ve spoken up in support of ArlCo staff but ArlCo staff has been pushing for the separated facilities this whole time. (There had been negotiations for a land sale but they were ended when Congress put the taking in a federal statute).

As for ANCC – I don’t know the story on those negotiations, but I know they happened before I was involved in this stuff – so > 6 years ago (and I’m pretty sure more than 10).

[dasgeh]

@arlcxrider 198631 wrote:

As a daily user of Quincy, I respectfully disagree that it’s a “seriously good project.” Southbound especially it’s a non-stop sh!t$how between Fairfax and Glebe. It starts with the never-ending utility work at Fairfax that has all but obliterated the lane between 9th and Fairfax. Then there’s the habitual lane blockers at the Marriott Residence Inn, the Domino’s pizza delivery guys that dart across the lane without stopping (or looking), and the Mercedes dealer–their trucks constantly park in the lane just north of Glebe. In my view there are far too potential interruptions, drop-off zones, driveways (pizza), and other minor intersections for the lane to operate successfully, absent a massive increase in enforcement activity. 5 times out of ten I have to “take the lane” on Quincy.

@zsionakides 198632 wrote:

Quincy St was watered down before it even got to the public for discussion – it had gaps in even the most bike friendly design which was not even up to NACTO standards, which it’s supposed to be per the actual plan the county adopted. I would not let my young children ride on what came out of that design.

Southbound from Fairfax-Glebe is a shit show – it was designed 2017-18 and implemented 2018 — before the revised Bike Element called for better. The post-Bike Element project was Fairfax – 13th — and the part north of Washington will actually be done once the Ed Center redevelopment is done, and the design will be up for review then. The final design is full protection Fairfax – Washington(except for the very beginning and end of that southbound – beginning is a bus stop and end is a right turn mixing zone). While I 100% agree there should be better MOTs (plans for our streets, etc during construction), the Carpool construction is not part of the Quincy project.

@zsionakides 198632 wrote:

The Columbia Pike cycletrack was easy as it didn’t require making any tradeoffs, except investing money in the corridor.

The Columbia Pike was a HUGE lift that involved convincing the DoD to include the cycletrack in the project. It’s different tradeoffs than reallocating space from parking, but it took serious leadership to get the cycletrack in the plans. It was not easy. (Also, fun fact: It’s not Arlington’s money. DoD is building as compensation for taking VDOT’s land.)

@chris_s 198634 wrote:

Gotta disagree here. Goals should be concrete and we should strive to meet them.

I think the structure of the Bike Element works: Vague goals that translate to specific action items and clear performance targets. And it makes sense to draft it from the broader to the more specific. I wouldn’t expect Arlington to *ensure* safety for everyone. “Plan for” or “design for” or something else sure, but not “ensure”

[dasgeh]

I think we should remember where we are in the process: we are defining goals for the Vision Zero program to start to develop an action plan. This isn’t the action plan. “Strive to” makes sense for goals, particularly when we’re talking about things like “ensuring safety for all users”.

@zsionakides 198625 wrote:

If Arlington were building PBLs across the county similar to 15th St NW, that would be a massive evolution from what they are doing today and I probably wouldn’t have much issue with the weak language in the Vision Zero document. The reality is almost every bike lane project in the county is heavily water downed by the time it gets to execution, to the point where it only serves highly confident riders.

Even though DC has issues with getting some of their PBLs going, the ones they do build are pretty good and tend to be contiguous. You look at projects such as 20th/21st NW or P St SW and those types of projects are almost never even proposed in Arlington, let alone built.

I often stand up and say Arlington should be doing better and moving faster in order to spur behavioral change. But it’s not fair to say that “almost every bike lane project in the county is heavily water downed by the time it gets to execution, to the point where it only serves highly confident riders.” Quincy Street is a seriously good project. The part south of Washington (north of Washington will be revisited next year) is fully buffered, and Arlington has been tweaking when they see the need to. There should be money to turn “buffered” into “protected” in the CIP. That’s not watered down. And it’s actually convincing people — including senior leaders in the County — that PBLs work and that biking is a real way to get around.

Veitch is good, Wilson is good, Eads is good. I would ride with kids on all of those. There are more coming in this year’s batch of repaving. In the past year, there haven’t been many other projects built. Of those designed, yes, there have been some disappointments. But more wins than disappointments.

And I will pit the cycletrack along the realigned section of Columbia Pike by ANC against the 20/21st NW cycletrack any day. That is an excellent design that Arlington staff fought hard for and got.

Again, I think we can do better. This next CIP provides a serious opportunity to get funding to move faster. I think if we can get the money, we have the staff that will design good projects.

[dasgeh]

@peterw_diy 198598 wrote:

That doesn’t sound like much. How many are there now?

Alexandria City fairly recently began to admit that traffic enforcement positions are basically budget neutral – they generally generate enough revenue from fines to cover their salary, benefits, etc.

Arlington doesn’t have any now. This will be a new team. The proposed budget does not assume any revenue from these positions — any money that comes in can be allocated during the fiscal year, and in future budgets, they may take a different approach.

[dasgeh]

The trail through Long Branch Nature Center that connects Carlin Springs to the Four Mile Run & W&OD Trails is closed. No detour. No indication why. People have been asked.

[dasgeh]

@Henry 198245 wrote:

Gillian, to whom at the County did you refer this?

Ritch, and I’ve already heard back that they’ve spoken to the contractor. Work will be done next month, which will require the trail to be closed for a few days – the detour will be the new sidewalk (which means the schedule could slip if the sidewalk isn’t ready).

[dasgeh]

Thanks, everyone, for reporting it to this thread. I made ArlCo aware of this thread, and they’re looking into it. The answer I got was that the developer is responsible for it, because it was a condition of the site plan. ArlCo should have inspected when it was done, and probably did, but it seems like these issues may not have been clear at that point (or I could be totally off and they haven’t inspected yet because the totality of the work isn’t done). Either way, developer is still responsible for problems with the construction.

FWIW, there’s been a kinda similar issue in Courthouse — a developer went rogue and changed the westbound (climbing) bike lane on 14th St N just west of the Queen St bridge into parking. ArlCo put up no parking signs but hasn’t restored the bike lane. It has been 6 months.

[Author]

Posts