[scoot]

@lordofthemark 138018 wrote:

I would love to see a study on relative safety that managed to adjust for both cyclist speed on a climbing lane, and for parking turnover rates.

It seems obvious that there are some situations where bicycles are safer sharing space with motor vehicles and that there are other situations where mode separation is safer. The challenge is identification and characterization of the features that define the boundary between these two cases. Examples of factors likely to contribute: relative speed, average amount of bicycle and motor traffic, average parking turnover, time of day, sightlines, mean vehicle distances between turns on/off the road, etc. Not possible to sufficiently control any existing data set, I suspect. A machine learning approach, with data from many different locations, might be able to make a rough estimate of the boundary for a rule of thumb.

[scoot]

@lordofthemark 138013 wrote:

this is not a bad candidate for a doorzone bike lane (I am sure the parking will stay

Is there such a thing as a good doorzone bike lane? If there isn’t enough space to get the bike lane out of the DZ, shouldn’t this street get sharrows instead?

[scoot]

@bobco85 137996 wrote:

This morning was probably the first commute in a long time that I did not enjoy due to a variety of factors.

But it’s all relative, right? Sounds like it would have been worse in a car.

[scoot]

@chris_s 137946 wrote:

None of my three least favorite signals are adjacent to 2016 paving so I feel your pain. [Incidentally they’re: Glebe / 7th St S, Arlington Blvd / Irving, Pershing / S Jackson]

Too bad. These ones need to be fixed.

50 and Irving: I don’t even bother testing anymore, I just ride directly to the beg button if there aren’t any cars waiting.

Pershing and N Jackson: I’ve had mixed experience there. Pretty sure I can’t trigger it with my road bike, but I have definitely succeeded in doing so with a CaBi.

Columbia Pike and S Courthouse: I think this one is timed, not sensor actuated, except for late at night. It often stops traffic on Columbia Pike when nobody is there. But I do recall trying to cross late one night and not triggering the light.

Also:
S Shirlington and 24th St S
10th St N and N Highland St: almost always cars or peds there though

[scoot]

@DismalScientist 137854 wrote:

Isn’t Glebe perfectly flat between Commonwealth and Rt 1? If anything, EB is downhill.

I would have thought so too, but Google Earth shows Glebe’s elevation ASL at Commonwealth = 14 feet and Rt 1 = 37 feet.

It looks like the road is only about 32 feet wide gutter to gutter. Unless the parking lane is removed, any bike lane is doomed to end up in the DZ, no?

[scoot]

@bobco85 137587 wrote:

I recommend using the loop ramp at the Franconia-Springfield Metro because it can be difficult to get through the Franconia-Springfield Pkwy/Frontier Rd intersections especially on the northeast side where a slip lane crossing is required with sometimes a nearly endless flow of vehicles reluctant to stop (you know, and follow the law by yielding to a crosswalk user).

Concur. The curb cuts to cross those loop ramps are very awkward too.

On skinny tires, I used to take Joseph Alexander / Metropolitan Center to bypass a poorly maintained part of the FSP trail. I don’t know what the present status of that route is. There is a gate.

[scoot]

@creadinger 137576 wrote:

One question I have is that I have always feared Eisenhower Ave, but the 3 times I’ve ridden on it so far it’s been pretty tame. Is that typical? Or are there times when it’s REALLY bad to ride on Eisenhower?

It’s not great. Most of my experience on Eisenhower is the short segment between Clermont and the Cameron Run bridge. As with most places, the vast majority of the drivers are fine, but I have encountered a couple of aggressive ones there. Transitioning between the road and the sidewalk, in order to connect with the trail, also requires some care. Some of the curb cuts are sharp and tend to collect gravel.

[scoot]

@rcannon100 137580 wrote:

For what it is worth, here is the Strava Heat Map.

I love riding Cameron Run / Holmes Run. And I love riding the VA CCT. Last friday we tried yet another way to connect these two loops. This time it was sort of Edsal Road. It sucked.

I am thinking the least bad route is simply on sidewalks – which stinks. Or maybe just give up on connecting Cameron Run to the CCT – which is what I am sort of thinking.

[ATTACH=CONFIG]11348[/ATTACH]

Maybe head further south down to the trail along Franconia-Springfield Parkway?

[scoot]

I occasionally commute this way. My preference, as it is the easiest route from a hills perspective, is:

Clermont Connector
R on Glenwood (first thing at the bottom of the hill: I find this climb easier than Clermont)
R on Upland
R on Larno
L on Jane
R on Ninian
R on Westchester
L on Brookland
L on Old Rolling
R on Trin
L on Brookview
R on Foldi
L on Brookland
R on Franconia

Yes it is a lot of turns! It took me a few times before that route became automatic.

Heed bobco85’s advice regarding the Franconia / Van Dorn intersection westbound! Be bold and highly visible in the lane that allows straight/right. It’s a tricky spot because some right-turning drivers can’t seem to decide whether they should cross in front or behind you here. From there, I have never had any difficulty westbound in the early morning taking a lane from Van Dorn to Beulah at ~ 18-20 MPH, but afternoon traffic on Franconia is often heavy and jammed at that intersection. So eastbound in the afternoon, I usually just squeak through on the sidewalk from Em to EHS (hopping down into the turn lane, when clear, in order to get on the left side of drivers turning south onto Van Dorn). Then the following traffic signal helps me cross the street and get back onto Brookland northbound. On the east side of Van Dorn, the curb cut angle and the southside Franconia sidewalk condition are both awful and often full of sand and rocks. I use the grass for a bit here.

I use Beulah to head south so can’t help you west of there. There appear to be no practical alternatives to Franconia Rd (or its sidewalk) until you get over the tracks.

[scoot]

@SurlyTed1187 137335 wrote:

I recently moved to N. Alexandria (Arlandria), and work in Takoma Park, MD. It’s a 13.5 mile commute in the mornings if I come the most direct route. I’m
finding as the weather is improving, the crowds of tourists are growing around the tidal basin/national mall/white house.

As I come off the 14th street bridge, I have to navigate my way past the TJ memorial, Tidal Basin, National Mall, and White House.

What alternatives during this part of the route have you found to avoid the large crowds of clueless tourists as they visit the monuments, and other sights?

Maybe try Ohio Dr to 23rd to New Hampshire? There’s a fair amount of traffic on 23rd, but you could either bail on F to 22nd, or else take 20th/C/Virginia/20th north up from Constitution. Lincoln Memorial crowds may be a little thinner.

[scoot]

@dasgeh 136507 wrote:

Fair enough. But then it’s not the same problem as on the Custis (which is parallel to the dominant direction of car traffic)

No, it’s exactly the same problem as the Custis. In both cases the sidewalk/trail is parallel to the main automobile traffic highway (MVT vs. GWMP and Custis vs. Lee Hwy). The danger being discussed is that posed by drivers exiting a side street and making right turns onto the highway (e.g. from Porto Vecchio onto northbound GWMP, from Oak onto westbound Lee Hwy) without looking both ways. Many drivers are oblivious to trail users approaching from their right, because they are only think about looking for highway traffic approaching from their left.

Essentially what we are discussing is a variation of the picture in BicycleSafe’s Collision Type #4: The Wrong-Way Wreck. In our case, the “wrong-way” riders are on a sidewalk/trail, not in the street, but the root of the problem is the same: the drivers aren’t looking that direction.

Exacerbating the problem in both these locations is a slope that enables “salmons” to gather high speed.

[scoot]

@Amalitza 136504 wrote:

@dasgeh 136501 wrote:

Just a quibble with this sentence. The people on the trail coming from the opposite direction than the cars turning right (“salmoning”) are actually easier for the cars to see then people on the trail coming from the same direction. The latter on behind the driver of the car.

No. We are not talking about people coming parallel the cars, but perpendicular to the cars.

Correct. The problem is that many drivers, only mindful of automobile traffic coming from the left, don’t bother to look to their right before making right turns. Thus the “salmons” are the riders at greatest risk of being undetected.

[scoot]

@DismalScientist 136462 wrote:

A green cycle implies that there is no conflicting cross traffic.

I don’t think that’s completely accurate. A green cycle merely gives right-of-way to anyone proceeding in the direction indicated by the green (which would be straight, unless it is a green arrow), but does not ensure legal prohibition of conflicting traffic. For instance, there are lots of signalized intersections with permissive left turns, wherein left-turning traffic is allowed to go provided that they yield to any oncoming traffic. The walk signal and the bicycle green signal function the same way, bestowing right-of-way to peds and bikes but not banning vehicle turns across the crosswalk.

This discussion does emphasize the widespread nature of the problem that right-on-red drivers pose for “salmoning” trail users when those trails are essentially glorified sidewalks (Custis through Rosslyn, MVT at Porto Vecchio, etc.). Although the majority of drivers are very aware and courteous to trail users, there are enough oblivious and/or inconsiderate drivers that these types of intersections are consistently dangerous.

Getting right-on-red eliminated from all such locations affecting major trails would help make cycling safer in the region. Of course the existing non-signalized intersections suffer from the same issues. To fix that, I would propose requiring all such intersections and driveways across a primary trail route either become signalized with no-turn-on-red signs, or else simply be eliminated. For instance, the intersection at Quinn is unnecessary; those drivers could come out at Scott or Oak. And the extra Marriott driveway is redundant.

[scoot]

@lordofthemark 136342 wrote:

Since so many auto trips involve one person (about 90% of commute trips, and a significant portion of non-commute trips) you are less likely to have a door opening on the right than on the left. As for evasive action, you mean swerving into the general travel lane? I find that an uncomfortable maneuver when there is any significant amount of traffic in that lane, so in a door zone bike lane I tend to go slowly enough to be prepared to stop if necessary – which I can also do in a car protected bike lane.

I don’t believe it is possible to ride slow enough to prevent doorings in spite of riding in a DZ. I suppose traveling slower would reduce the risk a bit but certainly would not eliminate it. A far better bet is to avoid DZs entirely. A bike lane design that makes DZ avoidance difficult or even impossible is critically flawed.

[scoot]

@Steve O 136269 wrote:

I would love to see enforcement of the No Right on Red here like they did at Wakefield and Fairfax last year.

I agree with the sentiment, but I’m guessing this would be a tougher sell than Wakefield, since there is so much less traffic and therefore less revenue potential. Wakefield includes a lot of thru drivers jumping off southbound Glebe in hopes of reaching I-66W a few seconds earlier. Oak Street, on the other hand, is only local traffic, so there aren’t nearly as many people making that turn.

On the other hand, for the same reason, most Oak drivers should be extremely familiar with that intersection (more so than the average cyclist coming through on the Custis), so there is even less excuse for ignorance.

[Author]

Posts