[scoot]

@PotomacCyclist 109585 wrote:

people keep reporting that NPS likely doesn’t have the funding to devote personnel and equipment to the task of plowing any of the MVT

I’m curious: where does NPS get the money to plow GWMP? (By the way in case it’s not clear, this is a serious, not rhetorical, question. But I suppose you can interpret it that way if you like…)

[scoot]

@mstone 109575 wrote:

Unless Arlington has some ability to retroactively block or delay the building of the GWMP they have no leverage.

One would think that the way to gain leverage would be to complain to your local politicians. Of course NPS leadership is appointed directly by the President. I’m gonna guess that plowing the MVT doesn’t rank very high on Obama’s to-do list for today.

[scoot]

@rcannon100 109517 wrote:

First off, simple principle. It is illegal to make any left direction turn from a lane other than the left lane (unless otherwise marked). So if you are over in the curb – you are in the wrong place to be making a left turn or a u turn.

And its crazy dangerous.

Yes it could be very dangerous if you can’t see far enough in both directions and don’t look out for other folks who are using or entering the roadway. But it’s easy in many places on wide streets with parallel parking to execute such a maneuver very safely (e.g. when exiting a parking space).

I grew up along a residential street in Prince William County. 43 feet wide (curb to curb), with ample parking on both sides, a double-yellow line down the middle, and white lines between the travel lane and the parking. 25 MPH speed limit with all-way stops at most intersections for traffic calming. Many vehicles parked in driveways, but others (myself included) parallel-parked along the curbs. Street parking was never remotely close to capacity (although this did not stop some folks from becoming downright belligerent if anyone dared take “their” spot…). I usually parked along the southbound side of the street. If I wanted to leave home and head north, I’d do a quick U-turn and be on my way. If I was returning from the south, I’d pass my usual spot, execute a U-turn, and then park. Folks parked on the opposite side would do the same if the destinations were reversed. Unless there were giant snow ridges narrowing the usable street width, no one would drive all the way to an intersection just to turn around.

I never saw any incidents resulting from this behavior, and I’ve never heard of anyone being stopped by police for doing this. I suppose we were not actually in violation of the law since the area was not a town, city, or business district. But it still seems unnecessarily restrictive. What’s wrong with just requiring yield of ROW to all other road users when U-turning?

[scoot]

Eh that’s actually not true I guess, given the Route 27 Trail.

But that’s NPS also. Which was my point: the only non-military-base bicycling routes from south Arlington to DC all involve NPS property that they refuse to maintain for winter commuters. If they can’t or won’t recognize the fact that they are responsible for a major transportation artery, they should be replaced with someone who will.

[scoot]

@PotomacCyclist 109547 wrote:

The MVT isn’t just a trail for a couple people. It’s the ONLY route to DC for people from South Arlington.

(assuming Fort Myer is off limits)

FTFY.

[scoot]

@chris_s 109487 wrote:

Arlington only clears a set of “priority trails” and that one ain’t on the list. If I had to pick a trail to add next year (that Arlington wouldn’t need permission for) that’d be it, though.

That said it’s located in VDOT right-of-way, that really makes it VDOT’s responsibility to clear it of snow…but I think we all know that ain’t happening.

I’ve actually never ridden that Route 50 trail, but I agree with its prioritization, especially given the ongoing uncertainty with accessibility through Fort Myer. But even more important: we need to find some way to get a reasonable ice-free route around the south side of post (I’m looking at you, NPS :mad:).

Currently, the only reasonably well-maintained routes between Arlington and DC require going through Rosslyn. That is ridiculously inconvenient for commuters from south Arlington.

[scoot]

The new Mark Center complex also has significant security requirements that rendered it all but incompatible with Metro-accessible locations. In the long run, this is probably a good thing for TOD, since employers/developers without similar security requirements can make more efficient use of premium real estate near a Metro station.

[scoot]

@slowtriguy 108844 wrote:

it’s illegal to flip a U-turn from the curb mid-block

Really? I’ve never heard this.

[scoot]

@Alcova cyclist 108336 wrote:

We also have no idea what might be driving the sudden changes to access policy. Maybe the threat has changed. Maybe the base just failed a readiness inspection for non-compliance with force protection directives. Maybe they have a new commander or force protection officer with different priorities. Maybe they’re just now getting around to it. Who knows? Certainly not us. If they believe (rightly or wrongly) these changes are necessary to base security, they are not going to factor much else into the equation.

FYI: This goes well above Fort Myer. The impetus for all of this is a high-level revision of Army security policy. Fort Myer is changing their procedures in order to comply with these new regulations. Similar changes are being implemented at Army bases all across the country.

Don’t expect the base commander to violate his bosses’ directives in order to accommodate through-commuter bicyclists.

[scoot]

@dplasters 108007 wrote:

Just from a curiosity stand point – if you believe that charities and religious groups should be taxed, I would like to know your thoughts on the mortgage interest deduction.

Too easy: get rid of it. Yesterday.

This is perhaps the worst of all special-interest preferential tax treatments. Remind me why our society should be encouraging irresponsible debt, inflating real estate bubbles, etc.?

[scoot]

@Raymo853 107901 wrote:

These ones are privately owned so there is validity to the their attitude. Of course I bet these cemeteries, like churches, mosques, temples, not really open museums, non-effective charities, …. hide behind tax exempt status stealing revenue from the municipalities they demand services from.

Wow, that second sentence is a mine field.

Yeah it’s a mine field, because it’s unpopular but so true.

I can purchase a two-acre plot of property and pay real estate taxes on it just like every other private citizen. Or I can invite a few friends over on Sundays, put up a few crosses and a steeple, and keep the cash myself. There’s no justifiable reason for religious organizations (and the vast majority of other tax-exempt orgs and charities too) to enjoy preferential treatment. Separation of church and state?

[scoot]

@Steve O 107958 wrote:

The “down but not up” restriction, as I understand it, is because people riding bicycles have been ID’d at Ft. Myer before entering at the top. If you ride up the cemetery, then you can enter the Fort without being ID’d, which I guess is a no-no.

This was my initial understanding. But every time I have gone this route (downhill only of course), the gate to enter Fort Myer from the cemetery has always been manned, and twice I have seen a guard stop automobiles approaching from the cemetery. I did not hang around to see if the vehicles were turned away or if they were admitted after ID’ing. I also don’t know if they were on official business. So Fort Myer could certainly ID anyone riding up through that gate, just as they do at every other entrance.

So perhaps it is the cemetery that simply does not wish to allow their grounds to be soiled by the sweat of uphill riders. I can only assume that they reached this decision after a democratic poll of the residents.

[scoot]

@mstone 107127 wrote:

Just as there are roads that don’t need any particular bike facility because people just drive reasonably. In all honesty I’d rather have that than a bike lane of any sort.

This is the elephant in the room! Just figure out a way to compel people to drive safely, and the vast majority of this infrastructure would be entirely unnecessary. Does anyone think that the solution to gun violence in a community is to get bullet-proof vests for all its residents?

And yes I fully admit to being an idealist (as opposed to an incrementalist or a completionist).

[scoot]

Potomac Cyclist,

FYI

It may look like you’re talking to yourself here, but I (and I’m sure others as well) do appreciate the frequent updates on all things CaBi. Thanks!

[scoot]

@dasgeh 107167 wrote:

I don’t think a dedicated turn signal allows for right on red ever – meaning they couldn’t have a right on red while Lynn has green.

Yes, that seems to be the reasoning.

But I do wonder how many of the LPI turners there even notice the new restriction. As in, how many of them noticed that the new traffic control signage and decided to turn anyway, vs. how many truly had no idea that their turn was illegal? After approaching a red, drivers generally don’t have any reason to look at a signal again before turning right; they just need to make sure they’re yielding to everyone. So this intersection now requires different behavior of drivers than any other intersection I can think of.

Somehow I doubt there is an effective way to poll these folks to find out.

[Author]

Posts