[mstone]

It’s hard to imagine VDOT actually acting on any of this data. IME the problem isn’t that VDOT is unaware of issues, it’s more that they choose to ignore them.

[mstone]

The problem I see here is that a couple of dozen posts ago someone proposed a couple of hypotheticals, and some people are supporting one and some people are arguing against the other, leading to an increasingly long thread where people are arguing for and against things which nobody on the other side is talking about. I guess that might be a first on the internet.

[mstone]

@Steve O 193392 wrote:

I cannot possibly disagree with this more. If the person walking or biking is in an expected and legal place, like a sidewalk, bike lane or crosswalk, then it is absolutely the driver’s fault if they run that person over. A driver MUST be cognizant of the possibility of a vulnerable person being where they might be. If there is not enough time for the driver to react, then they are going too fast.

Yes and no. It’s legal to be in the street, but it’s also required by law to have a reflector and/or lights.

[mstone]

@jrenaut 193313 wrote:

A good chunk of bike safety advocates, myself included, consider this to be pretty equivalent to victim blaming. Drivers running over cyclists riding legally is a driver problem, not a cyclist problem. Shifting responsibility onto cyclists, requiring us to wear special gear to survive, is just one more way we absolve drivers of all responsibility for their actions.

Bikes come with reflectors; if people decide they’re too cool for the reflectors and rip them off…well, they’ve made their choice. Equipping cars with a strobe just outside the visual spectrum that would still reflect off those reflectors is within the realm of possibility, as is a sensor that looks for those reflections. In fact, I’d guess that existing LIDAR systems in autonomous vehicles already get a signal bloom when they hit a reflector. The question is what a car does with that data–there are a lot of reflective things that aren’t bikes (starting with every single highway sign). My hypothesis is that cyclist reflectivity doesn’t add much information above what can already be determined from a combination of RADAR & LIDAR, but maybe the AI system can classify a reflective moving object as less likely to be a blowing trash bag or somesuch? At any rate, until we only encounter RADAR equipped autonomous vehicles on the roads I’ll continue to recommend reflectors–especially pedal reflectors and wheel or tire reflectors–just to be more visible to old-fashioned humans.

[mstone]

@zsionakides 193285 wrote:

I understand there was preference for the Lee Hwy bridge, but this bridge would have been much easier to build alongside the I-66 widening, vice as a separate project.

The difference is that there was a chance of the lee hwy bridge getting built.

[mstone]

@Judd 193257 wrote:

NPS and the C&O Canal Trust are making significant investments in restoring and improving the Canal with a long range goal of rewatering the canal and providing a smooth and consistent trail surface. [/quote]
That’s a pipe dream–the canal was a fundamentally bad design based on a misunderstanding of the prevailing conditions of the Potomac due to an unusually mild stretch of weather in the 18th century. What was expected to a 50-100 year cycle of flooding (and related damage) turned out to be a 20 year cycle of flooding and severe damage (and currently more like 10 years). The canal falls apart faster than it can be rebuilt with a reasonable level of investment. Stretches might be rewatered, but there’s no way 184 miles of canal can be maintained without funding commitments that are unimaginable in the current political climate.

Quote:

A 6.7 million dollar project to restore damage to the towpath and fix all of the weird and locks from Lock 5 to 22 was just completed.

To put that number into perspective, the 1996 flood caused $65 million in damage (with $23 million in post-flood disaster funding). The 2003 flooding caused $17 million in damage. The 2018 flooding caused $14 million in damage. The current maintenance backlog in the park is estimated at more than $100 million. Every little bit helps, but the reality is that the canal as it currently exists is unsustainable given the current funding model. Just keeping things from getting worse absent decadal storms is a challenge, given that staffing levels are around a fifth of what they should be. (Meaning that most of the park has no staff to show a presence to prevent petty vandalism, for example.) As a whole, NPS has an estimated maintenance backlog over $11 billion–so the odds of any park getting significant funding for anything other than critical projects are low. If you’ve been to Shenandoah lately you can see the same sort of thing: the park blew its entire maintenance budget clearing the trees that fell down last November (a project that lasted into May IIRC) so routine stuff like keeping the overlooks clear has been deferred indefinitely. I know the GW parkway division sent resources to help with that, as did a number of other regional offices (meaning those resources were then unavailable in their home office).

I certainly encourage everyone to help however they can, but understand that the goal for today is to keep things limping along in hopes that the future will be better. Nothing will actually get “fixed” until until well-maintained parks become more of a national priority. Anyway, when you see something busted in a park, be understanding. And do what you can to keep things from getting worse. (Obey the signs!)

[mstone]

@peterw_diy 193249 wrote:

“thought leaders”

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G_v6oceppSg

[mstone]

@The Five Eight Five 193245 wrote:

Dang, still no legitimate fix?

You must be unaware of NPS’s current financial condition?

[mstone]

@peterw_diy 193217 wrote:

Ah, John Townsend, the #1 reason I talked my spouse into allowing our AAA Mid-Atlantic membership lapse… they’ll have to wage their campaigns to induce demand and marginalize non-automotive uses without my money.

Yup. And man, do those people not take a hint that you don’t want to give them money any more.

[mstone]

@dasgeh 193086 wrote:

If only there were an alternative route on a continuous bike lane to the north of this stretch.

why would anyone need more than one bike facility?

[mstone]

@Sunyata 193077 wrote:

Yes. But if approved, it could take months or even years to recoup the funds from them.

good thing the road repairs were free, then.

[mstone]

@consularrider 193082 wrote:

Try the Knog Oi Luxe, about the same price as the Spurcycle and the same type of striker. I have a Knog Oi basic, a Spurcycle, and Crane E-Ne bells on different bikes. I’m going to look for the Knog Luxe and then decide which I like best.

I’d be interested in the results–IMO, the spurcycle really is that good, but a cheaper option would be cool.

[mstone]

@Hancockbs 192927 wrote:

Thursday Aug 29, shortly after 6 AM. Me riding toward Bethesda on the CCT, just before Fletcher’s boathouse.

You riding the other direction, yelled something about my “F—ing ight”. I can only assume it offended you.

You should know it is properly aimed to shine 25-30 feet in front of my wheel and was on its lowest setting. I has three higher settings if you should like to see them.

Despite your objection, I think I’ll continue to use it in the pre-dawn hours to see dimwits like you that have no lights or reflectors. Learn to look away from the light!

ninjas gonna ninja

[mstone]

@Steve O 192741 wrote:

I put in a request for No-Right-on Red at this intersection. Today I received this response:[/quote]
Raise you’re hand if you’re surprised. “Too much car traffic” is always a reason to say no to pedestrian safety improvements.

[mstone]

@Dewey 192720 wrote:

So your top picture is a mobility scooter, bottom is a motor scooter, these new vehicles are a type of motorized scooter, they are not mopeds or ebikes because they don’t have pedals. If they need a new name to distinguish them from stand-up motorized kick scooters surely it is not beyond the wit of man to come up with an appropriate name that keeps them herded together…sit-down motorized scooter, seated electric scooter? Sorry it’s the librarian in me coming out…must…classify.

I’m still just not seeing how they’re new. I guess marketing wants to give them a new name to assure people they aren’t dorky?

[Author]

Posts