Likes Likes:  133
Dislikes Dislikes:  6
ELITE ELITE:  0
Page 9 of 9 FirstFirst ... 789
Results 81 to 83 of 83

Thread: NOVA Parks Hearing in e-bikes

  1. #81
    Join Date
    Jun 2017
    Location
    Arlington
    Posts
    79
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dasgeh View Post
    Great. Submitting comments is a great start.

    I need to read the latest draft, but no draft that I saw called for any paint-only bike lanes. It may have said that sharrows could be used on low-speed residential streetsto indicate where there's a bike boulevard. It certainly did not endorse "bike lanes to nowhere". Quite the opposite -- the draft plan indicates that we need to build out the network, and identifies where that needs to happen. Most of the routes are along major corridors -- Lee, Wilson, Pike, Mason, Glebe.

    My biggest criticism of the latest draft that was put out was not it was not transparent. It would indicate where we wanted "improved" bike facilities, and would say that all new bike facilities should comply with NACTO, but wouldn't explicitly say "put PBLs here".
    A quick example that's in the already funded project list is the Crystal Dr bike lane. Per NATCO standards that facility should be a PBL or bicycle path based on Crystal Drive's traffic count, but they have just have a bicycle lane planned. Another one is the proposed "marked" bicycle lane on Lee Hwy between Veitch and Lynn, that implies striped and not protected, which is not within NATCO standards for a multi-lane road of that speed.

    The bike "lanes to nowhere" comment is a general comment I have about the order that major projects are undertaken. My view is that any sizeable project should connect to an already existing used bicycle facility to ensure it's being used. Otherwise it drives the narrative about unused bikes lanes taking up space for general travel lanes. A recent example I can think of is the buffered/protected lanes put on Van Dorn St in Alexandria between King and Braddock. Neither end connects to any other bike lane, so only confident riders are going to use them, which does almost nothing to increase overall ridership.

  2. #82
    dasgeh's Avatar
    dasgeh is offline Queen of Family Biking & All Things Kidical
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    5,492
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by zsionakides View Post
    A quick example that's in the already funded project list is the Crystal Dr bike lane. Per NATCO standards that facility should be a PBL or bicycle path based on Crystal Drive's traffic count, but they have just have a bicycle lane planned. Another one is the proposed "marked" bicycle lane on Lee Hwy between Veitch and Lynn, that implies striped and not protected, which is not within NATCO standards for a multi-lane road of that speed.

    The bike "lanes to nowhere" comment is a general comment I have about the order that major projects are undertaken. My view is that any sizeable project should connect to an already existing used bicycle facility to ensure it's being used. Otherwise it drives the narrative about unused bikes lanes taking up space for general travel lanes. A recent example I can think of is the buffered/protected lanes put on Van Dorn St in Alexandria between King and Braddock. Neither end connects to any other bike lane, so only confident riders are going to use them, which does almost nothing to increase overall ridership.
    The already funded list shows projects that are not being proposed by this plan, but that are already in the works. To change from striped to protected would be a new, separate project, and I believe Crystal is one of the corridors for better facilities. I'll double check.

    Lee was clearly a mistake. That should have been a two-way protected cycletrack on the north side of westbound Lee from Lynn to Cherrydale. I am reasonably confident it will come back.

    As far as the order of projects, Arlington generally builds projects where feasible. So, e.g., when Washington Blvd was being repaved, they put in the bike lanes. There was no bike-specific project that drove that. You're left with an unconnected network that way. But the alternatives are:
    - lobby for a large pot of money to tackle bike-only projects (more power to you in doing this, but budgets are tight, and the next opportunity you have to change the capital budget is summer 2020). OR
    - not put in bike facilities when doing other projects. I don't think anyone wants that.
    Last edited by dasgeh; 02-22-2019 at 01:16 PM.

  3. Likes buschwacker, lordofthemark liked this post
  4. #83
    lordofthemark's Avatar
    lordofthemark is offline I really need to log off the internet and go for a ride.
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    The forgotten corner of Alexandria, VA
    Posts
    3,077
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by zsionakides View Post
    A quick example that's in the already funded project list is the Crystal Dr bike lane. Per NATCO standards that facility should be a PBL or bicycle path based on Crystal Drive's traffic count, but they have just have a bicycle lane planned. Another one is the proposed "marked" bicycle lane on Lee Hwy between Veitch and Lynn, that implies striped and not protected, which is not within NATCO standards for a multi-lane road of that speed.

    The bike "lanes to nowhere" comment is a general comment I have about the order that major projects are undertaken. My view is that any sizeable project should connect to an already existing used bicycle facility to ensure it's being used. Otherwise it drives the narrative about unused bikes lanes taking up space for general travel lanes. A recent example I can think of is the buffered/protected lanes put on Van Dorn St in Alexandria between King and Braddock. Neither end connects to any other bike lane, so only confident riders are going to use them, which does almost nothing to increase overall ridership.
    The Van Dorn buffered lanes are in space created by a road diet done to improve safety for all users, including drivers and pedestrians. The reality is that bike infra in Alexandria is usually a side benefit of traffic calming. It will continue to be so until we have a much larger constituency of riders (which is why we need ebikes, scooters, etc). Timing is determined heavily by the repaving schedule, in order to limit costs and inconvenience.

    BTW the Van Dorn lanes feed into service lanes at the King Street end.

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
  •