Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 21

Thread: Encourage NPS to fix the Trollheim & Maybe Do Other Stuff on and around TR Island

  1. #11
    Steve O's Avatar
    Steve O is offline I really need to log off the internet and go for a ride.
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Dominion Hills in Arlington VA
    Posts
    3,591
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bentbike33 View Post
    How about connecting the pedestrian/bike facility on the SOUTH side of the TR bridge (raise your hand if you knew such a thing existed)
    Hand raised.
    In fact, one of my all-time favorite signs--shown here--is on that facility. For years I had hoped to take its picture, and then at Obama's first inauguration, we walked across the TR Bridge, which was closed to cars, and I made sure I did.

    I do wonder exactly how one is supposed to "Begin" your ride here. Dropped in by helicopter?
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	begin bike route.JPG 
Views:	69 
Size:	56.1 KB 
ID:	15306

  2. Likes Starduster, dbb, scoot, bentbike33 liked this post
  3. #12
    Steve O's Avatar
    Steve O is offline I really need to log off the internet and go for a ride.
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Dominion Hills in Arlington VA
    Posts
    3,591
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by creadinger View Post
    Someone should post a link to the Trollheim crash thread, so they can start getting an idea of how many victims there are. I'll leave the honors for someone who has actually laid down hard on the slippery boards wondering "WTF?!"
    If not you, then you are in the minority. I would guess at least 75% of bicyclists who have ridden regularly on that bridge, and that I have asked, have gone down at least once. Including me.

  4. Likes ian74, Starduster liked this post
  5. #13
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Location
    Falls Church, VA
    Posts
    625
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Steve O View Post
    I do wonder exactly how one is supposed to "Begin" your ride here. Dropped in by helicopter?
    Easy-peasy: take the lane on eastbound 50 anywhere in Arlington, take the TR bridge ramp (means taking a left lane on 50 at some point prior) and when you get to the sign, stop, dismount, hoist bike over guardrail and place on sidewalk, climb over the railing, remount, and proceed into DC.

  6. Likes Steve O, scoot liked this post
  7. #14
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    Arlington
    Posts
    514
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bentbike33 View Post
    Easy-peasy: take the lane on eastbound 50 anywhere in Arlington, take the TR bridge ramp (means taking a left lane on 50 at some point prior) and when you get to the sign, stop, dismount, hoist bike over guardrail and place on sidewalk, climb over the railing, remount, and proceed into DC.
    If the merge across 50 sounds a little scary, simply use the left entrance from 10th or N Courthouse.

  8. Likes Steve O liked this post
  9. #15
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Columbia Pike
    Posts
    1,334
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bentbike33 View Post
    How about connecting the pedestrian/bike facility on the SOUTH side of the TR bridge (raise your hand if you knew such a thing existed) to something, anything, on the Virginia side, like maybe the MVT (which should be inside the red box). Now if you get on that path, easily accessible from the DC side, it dumps you into a wilderness on the wrong side of the GW Parkway. With better access, making the TR bridge bike/ped crossings one-way corresponding to the flow of cars could be considered as a way to reduce mid-bridge conflicts and encourage more use.
    The Rosslyn Sector plan calls for connecting the South Side of the TR bridge to a trail to Rosslyn and to Iwo Jima. It'd be great to get NPS onboard with that.

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	rosslyn.jpg 
Views:	57 
Size:	18.8 KB 
ID:	15307

  10. Likes Starduster, ginacico, dasgeh, bentbike33 liked this post
  11. #16
    Join Date
    Jun 2017
    Location
    Arlington
    Posts
    26
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bentbike33 View Post
    How about connecting the pedestrian/bike facility on the SOUTH side of the TR bridge (raise your hand if you knew such a thing existed) to something, anything, on the Virginia side, like maybe the MVT (which should be inside the red box). Now if you get on that path, easily accessible from the DC side, it dumps you into a wilderness on the wrong side of the GW Parkway. With better access, making the TR bridge bike/ped crossings one-way corresponding to the flow of cars could be considered as a way to reduce mid-bridge conflicts and encourage more use.
    I would rather see one the pedestrian paths re-purposed as space for the highway and the other side doubled in size. If you took away the "shoulder" space as well, you could probably fit about a 9-10' wide trail across most the bridge. Raise the barriers up on either side and it's a comparable facility to the 14th st bridge. If we're going to spend money on an approach to the south side, which isn't cheap, it would be better to get a better trail instead.

    Having one-way facilities doesn't deal with passing pedestrians on such a narrow path.
    Last edited by zsionakides; 08-03-2017 at 05:08 PM.

  12. Likes Tania, scoot liked this post
  13. #17
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    Arlington
    Posts
    514
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by zsionakides View Post
    I would rather see one the pedestrian paths re-purposed as space for the highway and the other side doubled in size. If you took away the "shoulder" space as well, you could probably fit about a 9-10' fit trail across most the bridge. Raise the barriers up on either side and it's a comparable facility to the 14th st bridge. If we're going to spend money on an approach to the south side, which isn't cheap, it would be better to get a better trail instead.
    +1

    Good sidepath on one side of TR Bridge >> Second copy of the awful one that presently exists.

  14. Likes Steve O, Starduster liked this post
  15. #18
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Location
    Falls Church, VA
    Posts
    625
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by zsionakides View Post
    I would rather see one the pedestrian paths re-purposed as space for the highway and the other side doubled in size. If you took away the "shoulder" space as well, you could probably fit about a 9-10' wide trail across most the bridge. Raise the barriers up on either side and it's a comparable facility to the 14th st bridge. If we're going to spend money on an approach to the south side, which isn't cheap, it would be better to get a better trail instead.

    Having one-way facilities doesn't deal with passing pedestrians on such a narrow path.
    While a reconfigured TR bridge along these lines would be superior, it would take at least an order of magnitude more funding than a Virginia connection to the south sidepath. It does not look like the sidepaths could be converted to roadway anyway as they are not at the same level and are cantilevered outboard of the main beams.

  16. #19
    Join Date
    Jun 2017
    Location
    Arlington
    Posts
    26
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bentbike33 View Post
    While a reconfigured TR bridge along these lines would be superior, it would take at least an order of magnitude more funding than a Virginia connection to the south sidepath. It does not look like the sidepaths could be converted to roadway anyway as they are not at the same level and are cantilevered outboard of the main beams.
    You're correct, you wouldn't be able to build out roadway over the south sidepath. The best you can get is removing the shoulders and re-striping to get about 2-3 ft of additional sidepath on the north side, which still would be an improvement over what's there now. At least passing would be a little less harrowing.

    Ideally, one of the travel lanes would be eliminated and used to expand out both sidepaths to about 9' each. This would involve cutting the lanes to a 4-2 configuration during rush hour and 3-3 during non rush hour. It would require a traffic study, but may be feasible with the traffic levels.

  17. #20
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Location
    Falls Church, VA
    Posts
    625
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by zsionakides View Post
    You're correct, you wouldn't be able to build out roadway over the south sidepath. The best you can get is removing the shoulders and re-striping to get about 2-3 ft of additional sidepath on the north side, which still would be an improvement over what's there now. At least passing would be a little less harrowing.

    Ideally, one of the travel lanes would be eliminated and used to expand out both sidepaths to about 9' each. This would involve cutting the lanes to a 4-2 configuration during rush hour and 3-3 during non rush hour. It would require a traffic study, but may be feasible with the traffic levels.
    Unfortunately, the problem with either plan is that the side path surfaces are about a foot above the road surface. They cannot be widened without substantial construction.

    Stupid design.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •