Likes Likes:  50
Dislikes Dislikes:  0
ELITE ELITE:  0
Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst ... 345
Results 41 to 48 of 48

Thread: Arlington Vision Zero

  1. #41
    Join Date
    Nov 2019
    Location
    Arlington
    Posts
    84
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sjclaeys View Post
    Speaking of vision zero, that is what car drivers have right now of cyclists and pedestrians waiting to cross Lynn Street northward at the IOD due to the new huge "sidewalk closed" sign. Not seeing anyone, they are even more willing to ignore the no right turn sign during the leading crossing interval. I will "strive" to not get injured or killed.
    I was once telling a non-native English speaker that often the sequence of words has a lot of bearing on the meaning, such as the difference between a "firm mattress" and a "mattress firm." Or in this case, "zero vision" and "vision zero."

  2. Likes rcannon100 liked this post
  3. #42
    dasgeh's Avatar
    dasgeh is offline Queen of Family Biking & All Things Kidical
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    5,788
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by zsionakides View Post
    The county had plenty of leverage in the land sale and didn't use it initially. Considering DoD agree to the cycle track after the fact, I'm sure they would have agreed early on with little push back considering it's a very small part of the overall costs. Instead Arlington had to come back and ask for the cycle track later. It's Arlington's money in terms of value for the land and not getting better value for it.

    It's the same issue with negotiating with ANCC. Arlington could have came out with a much bigger ask - say an easement for a path all the way around the course or allowing legal usage of the road through the club for cyclists which would have huge benefits - but they limited the ask to a small path.
    There was no land sale to ANC -- This is a taking by the federal government. My understanding is that the push came from staff -- yes, we've spoken up in support of ArlCo staff but ArlCo staff has been pushing for the separated facilities this whole time. (There had been negotiations for a land sale but they were ended when Congress put the taking in a federal statute).

    As for ANCC - I don't know the story on those negotiations, but I know they happened before I was involved in this stuff - so > 6 years ago (and I'm pretty sure more than 10).

  4. #43
    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
    3,428
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dasgeh View Post
    As for ANCC - I don't know the story on those negotiations, but I know they happened before I was involved in this stuff - so > 6 years ago (and I'm pretty sure more than 10).

    I was not involved as I have never lived in Arlington, but my impression was that there was significant pushback from the politically influential country club, and getting the connector (tied in with emergency vehicle access) was considered a big win by everyone in the bike community.

    Getting a path all the way around a private club sounds really hard - Virginia code tends to protect property owners, and even when one is asking for a zoning waiver the concessions asked for have to be relevant.

  5. #44
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Columbia Pike
    Posts
    1,545
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by lordofthemark View Post
    I was not involved as I have never lived in Arlington, but my impression was that there was significant pushback from the politically influential country club, and getting the connector (tied in with emergency vehicle access) was considered a big win by everyone in the bike community.
    The membership of the club hated it so much they sued their own governing board for agreeing to the easement.

  6. Likes Steve O, Judd, wheels&wings, lordofthemark liked this post
  7. #45
    Join Date
    Jun 2017
    Location
    Arlington
    Posts
    225
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dasgeh View Post
    There was no land sale to ANC -- This is a taking by the federal government. My understanding is that the push came from staff -- yes, we've spoken up in support of ArlCo staff but ArlCo staff has been pushing for the separated facilities this whole time. (There had been negotiations for a land sale but they were ended when Congress put the taking in a federal statute).
    Any taking requires reasonable compensation even if put in federal statute. In general the preference is going to be for negotiating a sale, vice having to go through litigation to get it. The condemnation basically locks Arlington into negotiating a deal or taking their chances in court.

    This is similar to homes being taken by the State for a highway or other public project. A property owner can't simply refuse a sale. They either negotiate or go to court and get a settled agreement, which may or may not be more favorable.

  8. Likes rcannon100 liked this post
  9. #46
    Join Date
    Jun 2017
    Location
    Arlington
    Posts
    225
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by lordofthemark View Post
    I was not involved as I have never lived in Arlington, but my impression was that there was significant pushback from the politically influential country club, and getting the connector (tied in with emergency vehicle access) was considered a big win by everyone in the bike community.

    Getting a path all the way around a private club sounds really hard - Virginia code tends to protect property owners, and even when one is asking for a zoning waiver the concessions asked for have to be relevant.
    The connector was negotiated in exchange for expanding the ANCC's clubhouse. That type of negotiation isn't much different than negotiating proffers with any development. Getting a connector all the way around to Columbia Heights would have significantly more utility than just Arlington View.

  10. #47
    dasgeh's Avatar
    dasgeh is offline Queen of Family Biking & All Things Kidical
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    5,788
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by zsionakides View Post
    Any taking requires reasonable compensation even if put in federal statute. In general the preference is going to be for negotiating a sale, vice having to go through litigation to get it. The condemnation basically locks Arlington into negotiating a deal or taking their chances in court.

    This is similar to homes being taken by the State for a highway or other public project. A property owner can't simply refuse a sale. They either negotiate or go to court and get a settled agreement, which may or may not be more favorable.
    But this was exactly that negotiation. You stated before that the cycletrack should have been agreed to in an earlier agreement (sale). There was none. Arlington negotiated with the DoD to get the plan we are looking at.

  11. #48
    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
    3,428
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by zsionakides View Post
    The connector was negotiated in exchange for expanding the ANCC's clubhouse. That type of negotiation isn't much different than negotiating proffers with any development. Getting a connector all the way around to Columbia Heights would have significantly more utility than just Arlington View.
    My understanding is that Virginia law limits the kinds of proffers localities can ask for, at least for residential development.


    https://www.cvilletomorrow.org/artic...-uncertainties

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
  •