[Yule]

@peterw_diy 181196 wrote:

I got an immediate response from CaBi’s email provider that the email address “bikeangels@capitalbikeshare.com” isn’t valid.

The Bike Angel program is run by Motivate. There are Bike Angels programs running in several cities; I believe NYC was first. Afaik, all are centrally controlled by Motivate. The way to get an inquiry addressed is, I would presume, [something]@motivateco.com.

One reason for this confusion is that there are now two layers of “bureaucracy” in Capital Bikeshare, i.e. the CaBi layer itself and the Motivate layer. I don’t know who does what, but there are clearly some communication-mismatch issues; but, then, the relationship is still young.

[Yule]

Re Alexandria’s sluggish expansion.

Someone involved must think they are doing a service to the city by saving money. I say they are only hurting themselves.

CaBi is a really fantastic resource; it, combined with bicycle infrastructure, is as good a use of public money as I can imagine (speaking as regular and loyal user). I look back to when I decided to join, a few years ago: Why did I do it? I had never considered joining until a station was installed near where I lived. That was it. “Build it, and they will come.” If I am at all typical in this way, the relatively poor coverage in Alexandria is certainly cutting off thousands of potential CaBi people down there.

For this reason I believe that the best way to get more core/regular users is to put more stations near where more people live. (This may sound obvious but it ought to be enunciated; there is, anyway, a camp that would propose stations only ever go in ‘central business districts.) Few are willing to walk 15 minutes to get to/from a CaBi station.

Alexandria and Arlington both have traffic problems, and potential core CaBi users who live outside the CaBi coverage zone are now either driving or Uber/Lyfting. A wider coverage area in both Alexandria and Arlington will get a lot of those trips on bicycle.

Thank you, Bkingva, for raising this issue re West Alexandria.

[Yule]

My humble suggestions, if any CaBi people are reading this:

If, from time to time, stations go offline, we do understand (“Unfortunately, nothing can always work perfectly,” is I think close to what one of the most pleasant/personable customer service reps told me this week, while sorting out one of the docking issues that came up, as described in a post above). It would help the system a lot if we could all more easily contribute to the health of the system, IMO, as follows:

(1) CaBi does a great job letting users report defective or broken bicycles (the wrench buttons on the docks; the new button on the app (“Problem with the bike? Report it here”); and an email form in both cases for users to click one of a list of boxes to point technicians to the issue encountered), but I am told that there is no process to report malfunctioning docks and offline stations. One of the customer service reps told me there was no way to report an offline station except by a phone call to the customer service line. This seems inefficient, and most people simply aren’t going to take the time to do make a phone call each time. A way to easily report malfunctioning docks and especially offline stations would be nice.

(2) Consider a way to let users know that a station cannot be used at a given time by “greying it out” on the app. That way, people won’t waste their time going to that station only to be unable to get a bike or dock because a station is dead/offline (“disconnected” as the customer service agents all seemed to call it). There is already a process for this “greying out” of stations. Occasionally stations are cleared out of bikes and taken offline before special events, and then “greyed out” on the app’s map. Most recently I recall Rosslyn area stations were “greyed out” during the 36 hours or so leading up and during the Marine Corps marathon. So why can’t this greying out be a ‘live’ feature, just like bike levels are updating near instantly. This won’t help non-app and first-time users, but it will help core users.

[Yule]

I can only guess re the origin of these outages. One of the customer service people I spoke with speculated that it could be the cold causing these outages..but I don’t remember this from past winters (stations even worked during snowstorms in the past).

I can say this: Though I am an annual member, since the issues began I have taken to checking kiosks each time I take or dock a bike (that is, I don’t want to have to take a block of time to call in and sort out another docking problem).

Here is what I noticed: Sometimes I would go up to a kiosk to see its status (this is easier or harder depending on which generation kiosk it is; some have bright light screens and others are pretty dim at all times); I would go up to the kiosk and before I did anything I would see it was stuck on a loop, as if someone were continuously pressing enter (e.g., ‘Rent a Bike’) and then cancel, The kiosk would light up and then go dark, in a loop. I saw this at at least two kiosks. So if some stations are stuck on 24/7 loop, it must be using enough energy that could be overloading some of the stations. That part is inevitably speculation, but the loop is something I saw at least twice.

FWIW, I tried to get one of the looping kiosks unstuck (pressing cancel to get back to the home screen and let it settle and go back to sleep), and though it responded to my finger’s input initially, after a moment it settled right back into its loop.

[Yule]

This mystery station-outage issue has been bad at times in the past week. I have had several experiences, as well.

In my experience, it’s not just single stations down, but as often as not multiple stations in an area down at the same time. Sometimes kiosks display “Out of Order;” other times they are blank. I checked three stations in a row downtown a few days ago and all three were down.

Especially puzzling is that headquarters doesn’t seem to know when a station goes down. I figured out that they don’t know when a station is down from interacting with customer service people multiple times in recent days over this issue. The process which leads to the phone call goes like this: [1] a station is down but I don’t know it’s down; [2] I dock, and the bike locks up, but the trip is not registered as having ended. [3] I call in because the clock is still running and I am subject to overage fees. [4] Depending on how experienced the agent is, they take 30 seconds to a few minutes to check on the problem. [5] They always come back with: “Yes, it appears this station has been disconnected. We have alerted out technicians.” (I have had this same interaction several times in the past week.)

Now, I genuinely love CaBi. I do not post this to complain at all. CaBi is a fantastic service and a huge social good, of which everyone involved should be proud. I CaBi it survives, thrives, and expands. And that is my fear: If these technical problems persist, CaBi can only take a hit in perceived reliability (like Metro), which could reverse a lot of the gains made by now, as people abandon the system.

One reason I came to use CaBi is how much more reliable it was than MetroRail/MetroBus. I hope this bug, whatever it is, is founded and solved for good.

[Yule]

Good news!

Gravelly Point Station is finally online.

[ATTACH=CONFIG]18622[/ATTACH] [ATTACH=CONFIG]18625[/ATTACH]

Here is a shot I took a few weeks ago when it was in the process of being born:

[ATTACH=CONFIG]18624[/ATTACH]

[Yule]

@SarahBee 181932 wrote:

Tried the bridge coming from custis and MVT this morning. Horrible

I agree with your negative assessment of the conditions following the total downstream side shutdown this week.

This evening I witnessed (from the safe distance of a few seconds’ slow-to-moderate rising speed behind), a near collision between two bicyclists right at the blind turn towards the terminus of the bridge on the DC side. This even though one of them was ringing away at his bell to alert an unseen oncomer, there was no way to see each other and hardly the space to dodge out of the way; it was a near miss; my memory tells me there was some kind of construction-related equipment right there, partially blocking the sidewalk, which must have contributed. That and (obviously) the sudden rise in bicycle traffic, including by people who normally take the now-closed downstream side in.

[Yule]

@lordofthemark 181964 wrote:

http://www.thewashcycle.com/2015/08/connecting-the-tr-bridges-downstream-sidewalk-for-cheap.html

Nice ideas. No surprise that astute people have been making this observation for years. How many years? I see from Wiki that the Roosevelt Bridge opened in 1964; Anyone know how the long the (highly inadequate) sidepaths have existed as is? Can it be they are original, vintage 1964, highly-user-unfriendly paths?

____________________

Dream scenario :

A nice and wide, pedestrian- and bicycle-only permanent connection of the Arlington street network with Roosevelt Bridge’s downstream sidepath, along with comparable DC-side upgrades to finesse an easy cross to Constitution and 23rd St intersection via a bicycle-oriented overpass (no highway crossings), and for good measure a finessing of medians or whatever on the bridge itself to give a few more feet of sidepath — and decent guardrails.

Google Map seems to show a straight shot, short crow-fly distance from the Netherlands Carillon area to the terminus of the now-disused (sadly wasted potential) downstream side of the bridge. A short 750 feet from the low-traffic Iwo Jima access road to the point Google Map thinks is the Virginia-side terminus of the path, now a dead-end to nowhere in a field surrounded by highway. That is a tantalizingly short distance. As things are today, there might as well be a fifty-foot wall there now what with the jumble of high-speed roads mashed up in that area.

This dream scenario means: A quick (direct), safe (no car dodging at all between Netherland Carillon area and Constitution and 23rd), commuting-oriented (relieving pressure on the theoretically-recreational Mount Vernon Trail) connection from North Arlington to NW DC at last. Build it and they will come, as that one movie said. I would guess that perceived difficult crossing the river is the primary deterrent to thousands more from bicycle commuting.

(I see this was apparently proposed by a commenter at that WashCycle post from 2015, to which the site owner said there is something in the works for the sidepaths circa 2021, but he isn’t sure what it may be.)

I can see a ‘veto’ on this dream-scenario proposal, even if a magic wand could be waved to put it in tomorrow at no cost, for several predictable reasons. it would put more DC-commuter bicycle traffic through the Iwo Jima Memorial area and potentially past Arlington Cemetery, and for the historic views issue others have raised (which I honestly don’t really understand; there are noisy and wide highways everywhere around these so-caled historic zones, do they not detract from all the historicness?). Then there is the strong belief, from some corners — not from the Arlington side but from federal people seems more likely — that bicycles are best dealt with by segregating them off onto relatively limited-access trails. (Finally, there is the potential NIMBY-type fear that criminally inclined from that side of the river could use such an easy walkable crossing to target people or homes in the high-rent residential area behind Iwo Jima and beyond in Arlington, an area that is, as of now, cocooned off to an extent by the GW Parkway as a natural wall)

[Yule]

@bentbike33 181970 wrote:

I’m guessing this sign on the TR Bridge downstream sidepath is actually a practical joke.

Hah, so it actually says “End” in the middle of the bridge. Implied: “You’re on your own after this; lotsa luck.” Thanks a lot, guys!

[Yule]

@bentbike33 181963 wrote:

On the DC side, there is an elderly, sad, and neglected asphalt path from the downstream TR Bridge sidepath to a crosswalk that can eventually get you to the south side of Constitution Ave. You can see it on satellite view and zooming to street view on Google Maps. From some directions, it is easier to get to than the upstream TR Bridge sidepath as I discovered one day trying to find the upstream sidepath from the south (I eventually had to cross the GWMP, including hoisting my bike over the fake stone wall in the median, to get to the MVT).

I sought out this bridge’s seldom-seen downstream-side path from the DC side today, and saw that “elderly, sad, neglected asphalt path” first hand. It begins its tortured course from Constitution and 23rd and does make it to the bridge…but much is to be desired on the overall state of things. Improvements to both sides are needed if this is to be used to relieve bicycle-flow pressure on other crossings and not just be relegated to the hardiest of urban-explorer bike adventurers.

Improvements to both sides of the downstream-side path are needed if it is ever to be used to relieve bicycle-flow pressure on other crossings and not just be relegated to those with the hardiest of urban-explorer bike adventurer instincts and confidence. With so many stakeholders involved and the slow movement of bureaucracy, who knows when this might happen.

My impression of the downstream-side path: In a word, it appears to me the worst option of any Arlington-DC crossing, comparable in some ways but definitely inferior to the already-problematic upstream-side path. A shame, because as bentbike33 mentions, clearly someone at some point did put the effort to put in paved trail from 23rd and Constitution to the bridge’s downstream-side path.

Specific issues with the downstream side, as viewed from an approach from DC:

[1] Safety: The same issues the upstream side has low railings and narrow path — narrower even that the upstream side at certain chokepoints around streetlamps; [2] Multiple highway crossings once you descend onto the DC side; I think about three; [3] Some pothole issues all along the neglected connecting trail, including a major pothole right as the DC ‘over land’ portion begins, just as the path it begins its descent — this pothole is situated such that it may not be visible from someone incoming from Virginia, and seems sure to cause injury at an unacceptably high rate as is; [4] No connection to the Rock Creek Park trail right below despite that being, it seems to me, a potentially better cheap drop-off than forcing the cyclist to make three slow highway crossings, loop around all over the place, and inch the way to 23rd and Constitution.

I did not follow the bridge to the Virginia side because I already knew the most significant problem of all from bentbike33: [5] It dead ends on the Virginia side and does not connect to the MVT or streets without more dashing across highway.

[Yule]

Creadinger, sorry to hear about your bad experience.

@creadinger 181947 wrote:

from Suitland that killed Thomas Hollowell

Your anecdote led me to check the commuting data for Suitland (from the Census Bureau’s yearly survey); maybe unsurprisingly, is that ZERO bicycle commuters live in Suitland.

In 2016, the most common method of travel for workers in Suitland, MD was Drove Alone, followed by those who Public Transit and those who Carpooled.

Most common method of travel
1. Drove Alone 57.5%
2. Public Transit 24%
3. Carpooled 12.4%
4. Work at Home 2.5%
5. Walked 2.4%
6. Taxi 0.3%
7. Other 0.9%
8. Bicycle 0.0%

Suitland registered 0.0% Bicycle for the years 2013, 2014, 2015, and 2016.

_________________________

Based on growth in the 2010s, Arlington and Alexandria are likely to reach a combined 2.0% bicycle commuting share by 2020, or many thousands of bicycle commuters on the streets/trails daily versus something between about zero and twenty people (twenty pushing the high end of the ‘0.0%’ estimate’s margin-of-error) who bike-commute from Suitland.

FWIW, in 2016: Prince George’s County MD overall had 0.2% bicycle commuters, Washington DC proper had 4.6%, and census-defined Washington DC metro area (Washington-Arlington-Alexandria DC-VA-MD-WV metro-area) had 0.9%.

[Yule]

What can Arlington County do. It’s not clear to me that they can do much. Let me toss out an idea, because something is better than nothing:

– Erect a temporary ramp connecting the MVT to the upstream sidepath of Memorial Bridge with no need for the overly complex, dangerous, time-wasting detour. It would originate at a point just north of the narrow tunnel under Memorial Bridge. Perhaps there is a technical reason why this is impossible. For one thing, the land is owned by DC, which by quirk of history possesses Lady Bird Johnson Island in its entirety despite that island being, for practical purposes, part of the Virginia landmass (with so many bridgings it’s easy to miss that it ‘is’ an island). Ayway it seems ideal in theory because it circumvents all the current headache.
.

As for Roosevelt Bridge’s sidepath, which is not designed for heavy bicycle traffic, and which with the added bibycle traffic from the Memorial Bridge problem constitutes injuries-or-worse waiting to happen, forum member bentbike33 wrote this:
@bentbike33 181942 wrote:

It’s too bad the equivalent sidepath on the downstream side of TR Bridge ends on the Virginia side in the middle of a field surrounded by high-speed ramps and roadways.

I’d always thought the downstream sidewalk on the Roosevelt Bridge was totally inaccessible; in the times I have been across the upstream side, in small bouts of curiosity with no one approaching from the DC side I have glanced over, but never once have I seen anyone on the other side, walking or bicycling or in any other condition. It was hard to see for sure whether there even was a ‘sidewalk’/path or not on that side. Google Maps suggests there is some kind of path–it shows a dashed line, letting out onto nowhere-friendly on both the DC and Arlington sides.

So to use that Roosevelt Bridge downstream-side path (as of now very,very seldom used, I presume): Dashing across highways, required; time savings even with highway-dashing, unclear; easy access to trail or even non-highway street network, no [?]; width of sidewalk passable for bicycles two abreast, unclear (have never been on this path so cannot say).

which leads me to one other idea, for whatever it may be worth, if the Memorial Bridge temporary ramp is a no-go:

– Temporary connection of the Roosevelt Bridge’s now-inaccessible downstream-side sidepath with the MVT trail, similar to the above MVT-to-Memorial Bridge direct connection idea. Even if the Roosevelt downstream side path not very wide, ideally it could allow for one-direction bicycle flow anyway, in the direction of car traffic, with the downstream side going into DC and the upstream side coming to Arlington). The DC side would also need some kind of upgrade because it also seems to let out in a grass patch surrounded by moderate-to-high speed car traffic on that side, and I recognize this is all unlikely at very least because cross-jurisdiction cooperation required.

On the plus side for this case: The land involved is all owned by Virginia according to Google Map.

[Yule]

Thanks for creating this. As this is a new thread, allow me to summarize the problem for those who may read this and be unaware:

As of October 2018, there are problems to varying degrees with all four main central-Arlington-to-DC bridge crossings (Key Bridge, Roosevelt Bridge, Memorial Bridge, 14th St Bridge; see here for some thoughts I had on the problems as I see them, from the other thread). In fact, it is precisely this problem that led me to register here after lurking a while.

The loss of Memorial Bridge, IMO formerly the best crossing, hurts more than the loss of one bridge-crossing implies because it means the already-existing problems with the other two crossings coming from North Arlington are going to get worse, both with bicycle traffic and car traffic. The 14th Street Bridge coming from South Arlington is also partially knocked out for months more [?] (subject to time delay at least; some added element of danger; carrying of bicycle up and down straits required on DC side), and anyway 14th St is a substantial detour if going to/from North Arlington and much of NW DC.

[Yule]

@huskerdont 181934 wrote:

Trollheim

I am not familiar with the name Trollheim (from context it looks like you mean the wooden, elevated path of the MVT, also unlit at night, but at least plenty wide); I take it that this forum slang and not an official name for this section.

[Yule]

The author urges Americans to adopt the “Dutch Reach,” which means opening the car door with the FAR hand while rotating your body to check for cyclists on the road

Okay, could work, but in a place where people are all…let’s say “on the same page.” I could see Iceland, for example (a place I have never been) mobilizing towards this, getting this done as a cultural change. I am afraid that not enough residents of the USA would ever get the memo, or care.

The better solution on “dooring” is investing in more protected bike lanes with parking on bicycle lane’s left side(from the perspective of bicycle movement) and pedestrian sidewalk to the right: Still not foolproof as passenger side doors also dangerous, but likely to save lives over the long run. I assume most dooring happens on busy but wide-enough roads that, given different spending priorities, could have had protected lanes on them. Wilson Boulevard between Rosslyn and Courthouse in Arlington recently put these in, and I feel the dooring risk there is a lot lower over what it was last year.

[Author]

Posts