Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 34

Thread: Let's talk about Rosslyn

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Westover Beer Garden
    Posts
    2,481
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    I don't like two-way cycletracks when they are on the same side of the street because a single lane of bicycle traffic is going the opposite direction of automotive traffic. I think drivers don't expect traffic going the "wrong" way, which is problematic especially when turning. Furthermore, obstructions in the cycletrack may lead cyclists into wrong way traffic with high closing speeds. Obviously, there would be the same problem with a two lane cycletrack on a one way street or a contraflow lane on a one way street.

    Separation of a cycletrack with barriers (such as parked cars or other large objects) seem to me to cause potential conflict at intersections, particularly when these objects obscure vision. Separated cycletracks see to me to be analogous to riding bicycles on sidewalks with problems at intersections. Putting the two way cycletrack in the middle of the road (a la Pennsylvania Ave) seems better, although it violates the general notion that bicycles, which tend to go more slowly than cars, should be on the right. In this situation, I would prefer one way cycletracks (or bike lanes) on the right side of the road.

    As a hopeless vehicular cyclist, I don't particularly have a preference between a cycletrack with flexible pylons, a bike lane, or a wider "normal" right lane. I realize that this is a somewhat unpopular opinion here as there is this notion that cycletracks seems safer and encourage more cycling. In my opinion, many cycletracks when implemented seem to introduce more potential vehicle conflicts.

    Specifically, on Lynn Street, I would suggest a northbound bike lane all the way across the bridge over 66 with an easier curb cut to both the northbound sidewalk on the Key Bridge and over to the Mount Vernon Trail. I would put a wider sidewalk on the east side of Lynn to accommodate both pedestrians and southbound cyclists. Lastly, I would try to figure out some way that southbound cyclists do not cross the entrance and exit ramps to 66 and other cross streets too much more quickly than would be expected by a pedestrian using the cross walk. If southbound cyclists don't want to take that sidewalk, they can always take Fort Meyer.

    I am having a hard time visualizing a two way Lynn Street. Is there an adequate way of funneling all that car traffic to the Key Bridge?
    Last edited by DismalScientist; 11-19-2013 at 05:38 PM.

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    Arlington
    Posts
    307
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DismalScientist View Post
    I would prefer one way cycletracks (or bike lanes) on the right side of the road.
    Me too.

    Any chance that the sidewalk on the TR bridge is in the scope of the Rosslyn improvement project? It really should be wider and or separated from traffic with a higher fence.

  3. Likes Rootchopper liked this post
  4. #13
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Columbia Pike
    Posts
    1,292
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by GregBain View Post
    Me too.
    Me three.

    Quote Originally Posted by GregBain View Post
    Any chance that the sidewalk on the TR bridge is in the scope of the Rosslyn improvement project? It really should be wider and or separated from traffic with a higher fence.
    Definitely not anything Arlington has much say in. Probably DDOT, NPS or FHWA.

  5. #14
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Alexandria, VA
    Posts
    1,900
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    I checked out all the presentations that chris_s linked to, and I must say I really like the ideas of the Green Circle, 18th Street corridor, and having alternate routes to the MVT. I am curious as to how efficiently the traffic on two-way Lynn Street and Fort Myer Drive will flow, although I do understand they will each have slower (read: "safer" for cyclists) speeds.

    The Lynn/Lee intersection looks unchanged, though, which would be my only disappointment from this. Heck, if I had my way, I'd just close the exit ramp off I-66 altogether and solve the whole problem of the danger for cyclists/pedestrians. Important note: I am not and have never been a transportation engineer, probably for the good of drivers everywhere

    For another look, here's a cropped image taken from page 20 of one of the pdf's that chris_s linked to:
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	publicWorkshop_page_20.jpg 
Views:	147 
Size:	90.2 KB 
ID:	4090

  6. #15
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    Alexandria, VA
    Posts
    139
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by chris_s View Post
    4) Improve the connection from the Iwo Jima to N. Meade Street

    This would seem to fit in perfectly with many of those goals of the sector plan. Can you/others outline the problems with this connection as you see them now?
    It's somewhat a similar problem to the intersection of doom, in that the bike 'thruway' goes right in the middle of a major highway interchange. (though maybe more like the Memorial bridge connections on both sides of the river?)

    The (newish) bike lane on Meade goes away just before this point http://goo.gl/maps/8LlWY and you're then on the left of relatively high speed traffic coming off the ramp from eastbound 50.

    Then you got to get over to the right again at this ramp from westbound 50 http://goo.gl/maps/e2KPq - though the bollards help a little as well as the traffic backups that come from the light at the intersection of Fairfax drive which slows things down.

    what has helped it that they occasionally put a temporary traffic light here http://goo.gl/maps/GJ05I (I think a couple weeks before the July 4 fireworks - or it may have just been for construction and resurfacing last year) which slows things down too.

    I am perhaps missing the hyperliteral reading of this point, though it is correct - when coming around the Iwo Jima circle, there's a narrow ADA ramp here: http://goo.gl/maps/Ytnu3 but otherwise one has to go all the way around to the side of the circle http://goo.gl/maps/oU4MH, closest to the Netherlands Clario..., Calrio..., Carli... ... - the Dutch Big Bell Thing. Or go all the way up John Marshall to the Ft Myer gate and then onto Meade. So a better way of cutting through would save a good many minutes and some distance.

  7. Likes dasgeh liked this post
  8. #16
    dasgeh's Avatar
    dasgeh is online now Queen of Family Biking & All Things Kidical
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    5,024
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by chris_s View Post
    4) Improve the connection from the Iwo Jima to N. Meade Street

    This would seem to fit in perfectly with many of those goals of the sector plan. Can you/others outline the problems with this connection as you see them now?
    I agree with Kolohe on the need for better bike facilities on N Meade. When I originally wrote this, I was just thinking of the need to have a better way to get from the road around Iwo Jima to N. Meade. The most obvious solution, in my mind, is to build a better ramp along the south side of the ramp from N Meade to 50E. So bikes coming from Marshall Dr would take the (hopefully soon repaved) road into the Iwo Jima Memorial, then turn right onto the circle with cars, then continue onto a new ramp that take bikes up to N Meade. Bonus points if there's a light at the top of that new ramp, so bikes can safely continue on the 50 service road and onto the new trail along 27.
    Last edited by dasgeh; 11-20-2013 at 11:12 AM. Reason: names..

  9. #17
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    Arlington
    Posts
    307
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default locker room requirement?

    Are there, or are there plans for, a requirement that buildings with X parking spaces also provide Y shower/locker room facilities? (For me locker rooms are more important than bike lanes in getting me to bike to work).

  10. #18
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Columbia Pike
    Posts
    1,292
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by GregBain View Post
    Are there, or are there plans for, a requirement that buildings with X parking spaces also provide Y shower/locker room facilities? (For me locker rooms are more important than bike lanes in getting me to bike to work).
    Arlington's standard site plan conditions have required this for years, so it has applied to almost all new office buildings in Arlington.

    D. Requirements for showers and lockers:
    1) For Office Uses:
    a. For every 50,000 square feet or fraction thereof of office Gross Floor Area
    (GFA), one (1) shower per gender, up to a maximum of three (3) showers
    per gender, shall be installed for buildings 300,000 square feet of GFA and
    below, and one (1) shower per gender for each additional 100,000 square
    feet of GFA or portion thereof.

    b. The showers shall be located in a safe and secured area.

    c. Approval of Location, Layout and Security (Footing to Grade Permit)
    A minimum of one (1) clothes storage locker per gender shall be installed
    for every required employee bicycle parking space. The lockers shall be
    installed adjacent to the showers in a safe and secured area. Before
    issuance of the Footing to Grade Permit, the Developer agrees to obtain
    the review and approval of the Arlington County Police Department for
    the location, layout and security of the showers and locker room. The
    Arlington County Police Department will approve the location, layout and
    security of the showers and locker room if it finds them to be reasonably
    safe and secure.

    d. The lockers shall be a minimum size of 12 inches in width, 18 inches in
    depth and 36 inches in height, and shall be available to bicycle commuters
    during normal building operating hours; provided, however, that bicycle
    commuters shall be permitted to use the lockers for storage 24 hours per
    day, 7 days per week.

    e. Both the showers and lockers shall be available to all tenants of the
    building.

    (Source with more detail)

  11. Likes GB liked this post
  12. #19
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Columbia Pike
    Posts
    1,292
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Thanks to dasgeh and Kolohe for the detail on the Meade St / Iwo Jima issues! The current proposal calls for bike lanes the entire length of Meade (and I know the existing plans for the Meade Street bridge replacement include bike lanes) but dealing with the merges from 50 is going to take some care in the final design. I'll include all of your excellent points on the difficulty of actually getting between Meade and the trails/roads around Iwo Jima effectively in either direction. I think that intersection where they often put up the temporary traffic light could be a great spot for a HAWK signal once the connection on the east side of Meade has been improved.

    I worry about how much of this is going to require the cooperation of NPS. *sigh* Baby steps.

  13. Likes dasgeh liked this post
  14. #20
    americancyclo's Avatar
    americancyclo is offline I really need to log off the internet and go for a ride.
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    3,000
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kolohe View Post
    what has helped it that they occasionally put a temporary traffic light here http://goo.gl/maps/GJ05I (I think a couple weeks before the July 4 fireworks - or it may have just been for construction and resurfacing last year) which slows things down too.
    Quote Originally Posted by dasgeh View Post
    Bonus points if there's a light at the top of that new ramp, so bikes can safely continue on the 50 service road and onto the new trail along 27.
    In the afternoon rush hour times, I often ride past the carillon and up the ramp around Iwo Jima, using the curb cut and merging with northbound traffic on North Meade, then make a left on Arlington Blvd (access rd). From my perspective as a westbound afternoon cyclist the temporary light that was at N. Meade and Arlington Blvd access Rd was AWFUL. It forced me to stop at an intersection that never had enough traffic to pose a problem. Now that it is gone, I can slow down for any through traffic (there is hardly any ever) and make that left without having to stop and wait.

    It might differ at other times of the day and in different directions, but from my limited personal perspective, I would not want a light there.

    Has anyone linked to this map/survey yet?
    Rosslyn’s Future Bicycle Network:

    If you cycle to or through Rosslyn – or if you would do so if safer, more inviting routes were available – your perspectives, stories, and ideas regarding the existing network and potential changes that could improve the bicycling experience through Rosslyn are important to us. Click the link below to share your thoughts, which will be added to the collection of community input being gathered to help inform and shape the elements and direction of the updated long range plan for Rosslyn.
    http://sites.arlingtonva.us/rosslyns...hedule/survey/

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
  •