[dbb]

GWMP at Gravelly Point. It seems that a light pole was felled by an auto last night[ATTACH=CONFIG]20523[/ATTACH]

Given that the light pole wasn’t wearing anything reflective, it probably wasn’t the driver’s fault.

[dbb]

@Judd 194282 wrote:

Saw that guy feasting on a pigeon at Gravelly Point last Saturday.

pigeon – even more natural than a Kind Bar

[dbb]

Observed last night on the new fenceposts at DCA.[ATTACH=CONFIG]20500[/ATTACH][ATTACH=CONFIG]20501[/ATTACH]

Although the airport isn’t getting much service from the new fence, it is good to see somebody is finding it useful.

[dbb]

@dasgeh 193540 wrote:

The delay in rebuilding had nothing to do with getting approval — we haven’t gotten it yet

I will officially predict here that there won’t be a FEMA Presidential Disaster Declaration for the storm in Arlington. To get a declaration requires damage that exceeds a per capita damage level at both the county and state level. I doubt the state level value has been surpassed. I think the county level is about $3.80 per capita and the state level is about $1.50.

[dbb]

I’m game for Monday. What time?

[dbb]

@sjclaeys 192848 wrote:

While not 100% ideal, it really is not that bad and pales in comparison to other more dangerous infrastructure in Arlington County.

Well that’s damning with faint praise.

[dbb]

@Steve O 192825 wrote:

This is just one more example of why it makes sense to bring 90% drawings to the BAC. We would have caught this before it was installed. The same thing happened up the hill at Scott St. Arlington County had to go back and pay to have the pole moved, a waste of taxpayer money. That money and time could have been saved if the people who ride bikes–and are actually appointed to help the county make bicycling better–had been given an opportunity to see the placement first.

As an alternative, the BAC should review and comment on the design guidelines the county uses to identify the placement of stuff on trails, sidewalks, and similar places that may affect cyclists. If the guidelines are appropriately detailed, and there is a process where approvals to deviate from them is appropriately reviewed (and burdensome), it might be more self-correcting. Maybe the BAC should be consulted for deviations from the guidelines? At the core, you are right. The present process doesn’t seem to be working too well.

[dbb]

I thought we had “achieved” at least one of the triggers in the Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices

Section 2B.54 No Turn on Red Signs (R10-11 Series, R10-17a, and R10-30)
Standard:
01 Where a right turn on red (or a left turn on red from a one-way street to a one-way street) is to be
prohibited, a symbolic NO TURN ON RED (symbolic circular red) (R10-11) sign (see Figure 2B-27) or a
NO TURN ON RED (R10-11a, R10-11b) word message sign (see Figure 2B-27) shall be used.
Guidance:
02 If used, the No Turn on Red sign should be installed near the appropriate signal head.
03 A No Turn on Red sign should be considered when an engineering study finds that one or more of the
following conditions exists:
A. Inadequate sight distance to vehicles approaching from the left (or right, if applicable);
B. Geometrics or operational characteristics of the intersection that might result in unexpected conflicts;
C. An exclusive pedestrian phase;
D. An unacceptable number of pedestrian conflicts with right-turn-on-red maneuvers, especially involving
children, older pedestrians, or persons with disabilities;
E. More than three right-turn-on-red accidents reported in a 12-month period for the particular approach; or
F. The skew angle of the intersecting roadways creates difficulty for drivers to see traffic approaching from
their left.

Maybe this sign might both increase awareness and possibly encourage enforcement

[ATTACH=CONFIG]20331[/ATTACH]

Along those lines, I see a public comment effort to eliminate the word accident from the MUTCD.

[dbb]

@Brendan von Buckingham 192171 wrote:

Wheelchair ramp maximum slope is 1:20.

Actually, 1:12. According to the 2010 ADA Standards for Accessible Design

405.2 Slope. Ramp runs shall have a running slope not steeper than 1:12.

405.6 Rise. The rise for any ramp run shall be 30 inches (760 mm) maximum.

[dbb]

@Crickey7 192076 wrote:

I’ve seen no evidence that cyclists’ judgment in assessing traffic situations is any better than any other modal users. I think any notion that situation X will be okay if we just have more education is simply not realistic. People are people. You need clear, simple, and sometimes bright line rules to follow to ensure smooth flow and protect people. Again, the argument that cyclists should be entitled to an exemption from those rules rests on unsupported and unsupportable assumptions–or apply equally to all modes.

I’d agree with the need for “clear, simple, and sometimes bright line rules”, but that requires incentives for complying. In the case of traffic enforcement, that is generally absent (USPP and Hains Point stop signs being an occasional exception). Nobody gets pulled over for traffic offenses because that sort of law enforcement has be de-prioritized. The police departments generally establish their priorities and most have concluded that everything else is more appropriate. The excuses include short staff, traffic tie-ups, other higher priorities. Granted, we have all used similar lines with our bosses, probably with mixed success.

Any traffic safety initiative needs to provide great assurance that violators will be identified and recognized with fines and points.

[dbb]

@baiskeli 192023 wrote:

My theory is that this flood was so powerful and fast that it swept all the debris much further.

Nope. Low tide was at 0814 so the tidal part of FMR had no problem dumping into the Potomac.

[dbb]

@sjclaeys 191812 wrote:

Exactly, seeing the picture I could feel the mental activity going on.

My point exactly.

[dbb]

Yo: Cyclist on a CaBi in front of the Jefferson, on the highway side of the guardrail, heading across the river with traffic

Me: Heading up the ramp to the 14th St Bridge in front of the Jefferson, hollering that you were getting on the interstate.

You: Suggesting that I should “shut the F up”

While it appeared you didn’t die on the bridge, I hope that luck continued to your destination. Good luck with your decision processes, and the rest of your life.

[dbb]

@Steve O 191800 wrote:

The two forum members I recognize don’t seem to be taking any action at all.

While there isn’t a great deal of movement that would be visible in a photo; thinking, reflection, studying, cogitating, considering, contemplating, meditating, pondering, ruminating, consideration, musing, opining, and kvetching are all actions

[dbb]

@Steve O 191794 wrote:

When I go to the site, it shows $18 round trip.

Your reputation is known, even to the water taxi people. For the record, I’m cool with them charging a Steve O surcharge.

https://www.potomacriverboatco.com/commuter-passes/

Go to the Commuter Pass tab on the right and you will see two options

COMMUTER ROUND-TRIP TICKET – Valid for any Water Taxi
Valid May 28th through September 8th; M-F commuter hours.
Tickets are not intended for specific departure times, and can be used on any commuter run on a first come first serve basis. Simply select the date you want a ticket for. Once you have a ticket, it will scan twice on the chosen day. One scan is valid BEFORE 10 am, and one scan is valid AFTER 10 am.
PRICE: $10

and

2019 COMMUTER PASS – Valid for any Water Taxi
Enjoy unlimited Water Taxi Services from May 28th through December.
For Monday through Friday commuter runs BEFORE 10 am, you may go directly to the boat, show your pass and board on a first come first serve basis. For all other night and weekend rides ,you must stop at a ticket booth, show your pass and retrieve a timed ticket.
PRICE: $199

[Author]

Posts