[NickBull]

@dbb 71569 wrote:

Or as the non-economists on the forum would say, he’s one of “them”

Just how many economists are on this forum? I’m one.

Nick

[NickBull]

@Guus 70232 wrote:

Yes, Custis trail is kept nicely free from leaves, nice job.

I just don’t get it. Why do they have funding to have people out there blowing leaves, but no funding to have people out there in the winter blowing snow?

[NickBull]

@DismalScientist 68704 wrote:

The preceding analysis is based on paying someone $60/hour to shovel at 7/9 mph. I think that is optimistic. How much do you have to pay some teenager to get off his ass and shovel the sidewalk? Multiply that up to inflate the distance of your sidewalk to 7/9 of a mile and you will be paying a lot more than $60.

No it isn’t. It’s based on paying someone $60 an hour to drive a self-propelled snowblower that handles 83 tons per hour. The calculations involving hand-shoveling are to figure out how much snow is 83 tons.

[NickBull]

@GregBain 68679 wrote:

Ok – So far I’ve proposed two solutions – 1) we pay for it our selves with a direct bill to those people who volunteer to be billed. 2) we propose a bike tax to pay for it (I don’t accept the “the bike tax will cost more to implement than it will generate” argument b/c you simply raise the tax to cover implementation + desired service).

I’ve read a suggestion that we clear the trail ourselves. – Which is an option and something I’d participate in.

And I’ve read a lot of complaints. Unfortunatly complaints didn’t clear trails (although they are helpful in identifying problems).If they did we wouldn’t be having this conversation.

The point of my post – which someone said they missed, was to propose a solution to snowy trails.

I think I’ve said my piece on this topic; which is in summary, that (winter) trail users should and can pay for snow removal if they really want it.

But you’ve ignored everyone else’s proposed solution: This is already something that should be getting paid for out of the taxes that we pay to Arlington. And you ignored my analysis of the costs of clearing the Custis Trail. As Tim Kelley points out, the trail is only 4.4 miles long, so take my estimate and multiply by 4.4/7 to get a re-estimated annual cost to clear the Custis of $3400.

So given that there were 900 cyclists using the Custis in January, as cited by rcannon, that amounts to $3.80 per cyclist (maybe some cyclists are double-counted, but if the paths were cleared regularly there would also likely be more cyclists).

Now, one of the main points of having a government is to eliminate free rider problems. So collecting $3.80 from each of those people in turn is not necessary. We just fund this out of the general fund.

And we realize that we are talking about spending one metro fare on each of these riders to keep the Custis clear through the winter.

I suspect that we are paying way more than that per driver to keep the roads clear. And since most local roads are paid for with local taxes, you are paying this with your property taxes (are there Arlington-specific sales taxes? I don’t think so, but maybe.)

[NickBull]

@mstone 68621 wrote:

http://powerequipment.honda.com/snowblowers/models/hs1336ias (side note, I really want one. it throws snow 60 feet!)

What I don’t know is how fast it goes/how many you’d need.

Well, it says it clears 83 tons per hour.

So how much snow is that? I am guessing from what it feels like when I am out there shoveling, that a one-foot deep snowfall wights about 20 pounds on my 2-foot-wide by 1-foot-deep shovel. So each 20-pound shovelful clears another foot forward of a two-foot-wide path. There are 8300 shovelfulls in 83 tons. So that means in an hour, it clears a 2-foot-wide path for a little over a mile and a half. I think the Custis is about 7 miles long, more or less, so one person could clear a 4-foot wide swath of the Trail in 9 hours. So paying them $60 per hour would cost 9×60=$540 to clear the whole trail. Most snowfalls are considerably less deep but occasionally we have snowmageddon’s. Taking rcannon’s 8.3 days of snowfall as accurate, and if any of my other guesses are in the ballpark of correct, it shouldn’t cost more than $5,400 average per year to keep the whole Custis clear.

Measuring the number of bikes in January is probably not all that good a measure. Many cyclists just stop riding the Trail because 1) it is unpredictable whether it will be clear or not, and 2) once you stop riding for a week in the winter it is tough to start up again. You just wait until spring. If the trail was predictably clear then ridership might be likely to stay higher.

If the “snow period” is three months long that is 65 weekdays. If the trail is snowy/icy for half of them (behind the concrete barriers, snow and ice get little melting done because they are in shadow) then that is 32 weekdays. So if each of those weekdays has an extra thousand trips because it is now passable (and expected to be passable) then that is 32,000 trips. At a cost of $5400, that works out to 16 cents per trip. Of course, there are also pedestrians so that reduces the cost per trip even further.

How much is the snow removal budget for each vehicle trip on roads?

Nick

[NickBull]

@rcannon100 68408 wrote:

This isnt entirely true. Why, because the trails themselves are not the same. The trails have changed since 1991. The big one is the FMR connector from Shilington to CC. Other improvements include improved crossings, improved signs, and improved hours.

On point, you are right. Snow plowing has not changed. And I would agree with the bigger point – Arlco continues to not treat the bike arteries as vital transportation lanes. Parks and Wreck thinks nothing of closing the bike trails during rush hour and not providing adequate detours.

However, progress? in the big picture, there has been tremendous progress. And I feel much safer cycling in Arlington than I did 25 years ago.

Hi, rcannon100, when I said “no progress on this issue” I meant the issue of snow plowing, not the issue of cycling in Arlington. On the latter I agree there’s definitely been progress.

[NickBull]

@mstone 68315 wrote:

Um, I think that is exactly what the plan is. (They’re not great about minor roads, either.)

Interestingly, a few years back they got really good about clearing the road I live on. Turned out, a neighbor tells me that one of the news media people had moved onto my street. But they moved and my street is back to normal.

[NickBull]

@Tim Kelley 68306 wrote:

Try to have a little more faith! Be the change you want to see. It can’t hurt to share your thoughts with your favorite County Board Member!

Tim,

I’d have more faith if there were any signs of progress on this issue. The trails are just as unplowed now as when I moved here in 1991.

Nonetheless, thanks for posting the email address.

Nick

[NickBull]

@DismalScientist 68259 wrote:

I think you are missing my point. I have no problem with the county plowing the trails. However, you picked a trail to complain about that 1) is a sidewalk and therefore should be cleared by property owners and 2) is a place with an adequate on-street alternative one block away.

I can assure you that I ride all winter and on the Custis, if appropriate. I try to avoid the Custis downhill in that area in both winter and otherwise as I view it as unsafe relative to on street routing. It is unsafe, in my opinion, because it is basically a sidewalk into Rosslyn. Generally, I will take Clarendon down the hill and take Lynn, thereby avoiding the intersection of doom. An alternative for those of fainter heart (and the answer to your alternative routing questions) is to take Key to Veitch, make a left, cross Lee Hwy, continue straight on 22nd (I think) and continue straight on Scott (again across Lee Hwy) and straight onto Key again to Nash.

Places like Arlington have a big problem with large snowfalls because they are rare and people are generally unaccustomed to dealing with snow. Arlington has adequately demonstrated that it cannot get neighborhood streets or public sidewalks plowed after large snowfalls. As a result schools are cancelled for long periods, etc. It just seems a little rich to suggest that Arlington lose its bicycle friendly status over this issue. As I pointed out, there are other bicycle friendly locations where trails remain ice covered in winter.

Very little of the Custis is sidewalk that should be cleared by property owners. Going down Custis toward DC, basically the start of the descent down Rosslyn Hill is in a city park. Then from Scott to Quinn is sidewalk on the Lee side of the sound barrier. I don’t think that the sidewalk-clearing law applies in that case since the barrier separates the property from the sidewalk. Continuing down the hill from Quinn to N. Oak St is on paved bike trail. I doubt that property owners are required by law to clear paved bike trail. After N. Oak St., you’re done with the descent. I agree that it seems like Key Marriott should be clearing that sidewalk. But the entire descent down Rosslyn Hill seems to me to be Arlington’s responsibility. And other than this section of the Custis trail that has some sidewalks, very nearly the entire remainder of the trail is paved bike trail that does not appear to me to be property owner’s responsibility. (The only other exception I can think of is the sidewalk at the top of Rosslyn Hill on the bridge over 66–again, Arlington’s responsibility.) So … sure, Arlington can say it will clear the Custis except the parts that should be cleared by property owners. But then it would be accepting responsibility for clearing the whole trail except by Key Marriott.

I will probably try your suggested route, thanks. That’s an acceptable detour for bikes. For pedestrians, there is no reason they should need to add that much distance. I understand, the trail is not a top priority route to clear. But after they’re done with major and minor roads, they can have a few workers with snowblowers get out there and clear the trail.

Nick

[NickBull]

@Tim Kelley 68270 wrote:

And as an Arlington resident, did you send the same sentiments to your elected officials and the county government?

Hi, Tim,

No. Since I have friends on this Forum who are Arlington residents who have volunteered on Arlington bike committees for numerous years and who have brought up the issue of snow removal year after year, it is abundantly clear that contacting Arlington politicians is a waste of time. They have demonstrated abundantly that they just don’t care what we think.

However, they do seem to care about their bicycle-friendly “status”, so it seemed like as a League member it is reasonable for me to complain to the League. Perhaps the League might have some influence where actual Arlington residents have none.

Seemed like it’s worth a shot since all attempts that I know of to go through official channels have met with complete failure.

The notion that this is just beyond the capability of one of the richest per-capita cities in the entire nation beggars belief. As others have pointed out, it doesn’t have to be scraped to bare pavement and salted–plowing to the point where there is just a little snow is a big improvement. A few years ago, someone who lives near the trail and uses it to walk to the E Falls Church metro just went out there with their own snowblower and cleared themselves a large segment.

Nick

[NickBull]

@DismalScientist 68248 wrote:

Scott become the eastern part of Key Blvd, which goes down to Nash in the heart of Rosslyn and has bike lanes.

The Marriott should be shoveling the sidewalk in front of the hotel, as should all the other apartment complexes up the hill, just as I have to shovel the sidewalk in front of my house, even though I don’t own that sidewalk. The rest of the Custis, W&OD and MVT are a different matter.

What I find interesting is that while the #7 bike friendly community, Madison, WI, does plow bike trails, they do not use chemicals to deice them (nor the neighborhood streets) to limit algae growth in the lakes. As a result, winter bike commuters recommend the use of studded tires. Plowing only works for big storm events and little ones will leave ice regardless. We should be happy here that, unlike Madison, we have the solar snowplow that does most of the work. For in Madison, the streets can remain ice-packed all winter.

You obviously haven’t tried to ride the Custis trail in the winter, if you think that the solar snowplow does much work. Behind the sound barrier, the trail gets little sunlight, and it can take weeks to melt.

As to Key Blvd, what is your on-road path from N. Rhodes St to Key Blvd? Either you have to go over to Lee Hwy or Wilson Blvd. Have you actually ridden this in the winter or are you just looking at Google Maps?

I’m fine with using studded tires. But when the snow is deeper than your axles, studded tires don’t do much good, you are not moving forward through snow that deep. Well, maybe if I had a Surly Moonlander: http://surlybikes.com/bikes/moonlander Studded tires are available for that bike, too, though they’re $150 apiece.

Studded tires don’t help pedestrians very much, though.

Nick

[NickBull]

@DismalScientist 68242 wrote:

Gee, l always thought it was the responsibility of property owners to clear the sidewalks in front of their establishments. Furthermore, Key Blvd. provides bike lanes between the locations in question.

Since my post is the only one I see that mentions locations, I’m assuming this is a response to it.

I don’t think the Custis Trail counts as the responsibility of the property owners, unless you’re referring to Arlington County’s responsibility.

Key Blvd stops at Rhodes St., it does not go down Rosslyn Hill.

Nick

[NickBull]

@Steve O 67983 wrote:

Chris Slatt posted this message from David Goodman of the Arlington County Staff on the Arlington County Bicycle Advisory Committee list serve this morning:

As I have told the committee before, if Arlington continues to insist that it somehow deserves to be considered for a Gold Bicycle-Friendly Community certification from the League of American Bicyclists, I will personally go down to their offices and lobby to have it rolled back to Silver. No community that treats its bicycle and ped transportation corridors as second-class to its roads deserves to consider itself somehow among the elite communities in the United States.

I just sent the following to Andy Clarke and the League of American Bicyclists:

Dear Andy Clarke and League of American Bicyclists,

Yet again, Arlington VA plans to fail to plow routes that are critical to bicycle-commuters and pedestrians alike. See email copied below. In particular, the only route from the top of Rosslyn Hill down to Key Bridge and also to the Rosslyn Metro is the shared sidewalk / Custis-trail-bikepath. Arlington’s neglect of plowing this critical route goes beyond cost savings to negligently endangering its citizens because this path is shaded and turns into sheer ice nearly every winter. Thousands are forced to walk down an ice-laden path if they want to get to the metro. Few cyclists ride through the winter because the route becomes impassable except to cyclists with studded tires.

For this reason, I request that you at least downgrade Arlington, VA’s status as a “bicycle friendly city”, if not eliminate its status entirely. To openly and repeatedly crow about being “pedestrian and bicycle friendly” while year-after-year neglecting such a rudimentary task as plowing critical bicycle and pedestrian routes is the height of hypocrisy. By its actions, Arlington reveals that the only vehicle that it is truly friendly to is the automobile. However, Arlington does seem to be proud of being able to put up signs saying that it is bicycle friendly. Perhaps if LAB were to remove Arlington’s status, Arlington will wake up to its responsibilities.

Ironically, the rise of big city government’s role in providing public goods in the U.S. was in part prompted by a major snowstorm in New York city in the 1800’s. Until that time, there was no organized system for handling snow removal. The public outcry was so great that New York city created the first organized system for snow removal. Apparently, Arlington doesn’t seem to have yet become aware that it is failing in this fundamental duty to its citizens.
Sincerely,

Nicholas Bull

[NickBull]

@dasgeh 67581 wrote:

Fair enough.

Last time I went through there, I was headed to Shirlington, so turned right at the T. A minute later I realized that I needed to go through Pentagon City, and it would be better to go through LBJ grove. So I turned around (safely) and started biking in the other direction, this time going straight through the T. It was a very good thing I hadn’t gotten up to speed yet, as a guy came FLYING down from the bridge to turn right, and came inches from my front tire as I SLAMMED on my brake. It was insane. And not so much as an apology. He very much had the look of someone who did this every day. (This was not this week – the weather was perfect, so no reason to expect an empty trail).

I’ve had similar experiences there. That wasn’t the first, but it was the worst.

I’ve also had numerous encounters with people riding dangerously there — sometimes because they’re stopped where you don’t expect them, sometimes barreling down the dirt path and merging heedlessly, etc. All of which is one more reason not to have anything on the ramp or at that corner that might distract people &/or cause them to stop in the middle of the path.

Nick

[NickBull]

@Arlingtonrider 67494 wrote:

Going on right now – Dirt and other forum friends will be at the MVT/14th st. Bridge split this afternoon and evening (10/24/13) to spread WABA membership love and facilitate signing up or renewing memberships on the spot. Come by and visit if you can!

Riding home from DC, the most hazardous part of my ride is coming off the 14th Street bridge and making the left turn on MVT. The last thing anyone needs on the down-ramp or at the turn onto the MVT is more distractions, either for themselves or for other riders who might therefore ride more unpredictably.

Last night, there were a bunch of people making that hazard even worse by standing halfway down the downramp with signs and then another group standing right at the turn onto the MVT. I noticed on the way in this morning that the on-ramp sidewalk is chalked with “STOP” and “WABA”.

Was that you guys?

Can I suggest _not_ creating hazards for cyclists? Several of you could have stood on the MVT a few feet to the south of the corner, on the right, and several at to the north of the corner at the little turnout that is 20 feet north. Everyone who is coming off the 14th St bridge would have gone by one of those groups, and everyone going either direction on the trail would also go by one of the groups. So you’d still see the same riders but without creating a hazard for them. Plus, since riders no longer have to divide their attention between staying alive and reading your signs, they might actually have more of a chance to read your signs.

Nick

[Author]

Posts