August 2008 Arlington BAC Meeting Notes

Arlington Bicycle Advisory Committee
August 4, 2008 Meeting notes

NOTE: These are Draft notes, they have not been corrected or officially adopted by the BAC.

1. Richard Moeur, ­ Chairman Bike Tech Committee NCUTCD and Dwight Kingsbury, chair of the NCHRP panel supervising the latest update of the AASHTO Bike Guide talked about the upcoming changes to signage recommendations, see Richard’s web site.

Some highlights:

• AASHTO is recommending for streets with car parking that the outside bike lane stripe be 12 feet from the curb face, measured to the center of the outside stripe. Communities can carve that up anyway they want to.
• Design speeds: there may be some flexibility proposed to use lower design speeds except for downhill curves. The 85th percentile bike speed on flat trails has been measured as 14 mph. No static signal has any effect on sidepath crossings, so active lights are needed.
• Florescent signage seems very visible but does not change driver behavior.
• The center of a sharrow should probably be 4 feet from a curb, or 11 feet when parking is present.
• AASHTO is adding a section on traffic calming measures and bicycles, along with more on detection for signal changes.

2. Richard also made a short presentation on the  AASHTO Task Force on US Numbered Bicycle Routes, reviving cross-US bicycle routes, with numbers and signs. See the Adventure Cycling site for details.

3. County Board Bike Ride ­A Saturday in October will be found when Board members will be available. The route will feature the Columbia Pike Bicycle Boulevards and some of the Arlington Boulevard Trail improvements that have not happened yet.

4. CIP provisions for bicycles The recently approved Capital Improvement Plan has almost nothing for bicycles in the next two fiscal years except State and Federal funding of about $400,000 each year. Funding for “safety improvements” (paving) is limited to $50,000 in FY 2010, with zero for this year. There were negative comments from some BAC members.

5.  Detector loops - “the County should make sure that any on-demand signal recognizes a bicycle.” We will discuss it further in November.

-------------------------------------------
Bicycle-related facilities project list
-------------------------------------------

Bicycle Safety                                                                Placeholder

Bicycle Shelters                                                             Initial project request

N Vernon - N.Vermont & N. Upton St   Donaldson Run      On hold

Bike Lane Implementation                                               Active

I-395 Shirlington Underpass FMR Trail ­ Spring ‘09              Active

Hoffman Boston connector/S.Queen St.&  S.Army Navy Dr.  Canceled

George Washington overpass to Mt. Vernon trail               Active

Arlington Boulevard Trail Renovation                                 Active

Wash. Blvd. trail from Arl. Blvd. to  ...  - Phase I                Active

Route 110 trail Mem.Dr. to Pentagon Gen'l Improvements  Active

General trail improvements                                              Active

Wash Blvd trail to S. Rolfe St. - Phase II                          Funded

Old Dom. Dr. on-street - 23rd St. to 26th St. N.  Phase I   Active

S. Glebe Road at W. Glebe Rd Pedestrian Improvements Funded

Old Dom. Dr. on-street - 26TH ST. TO 25TH ST. N           Active

==========================================
-------------------------------------------
Consultant Activities on above projects through June 30
-------------------------------------------

Washington Boulevard Trail
Phase I is out to bid. Reviewed design options for Phase ll including potential connection to Columbia Pike in conjunction with Washington Boulevard interchange construction.

Route 110 Trail
Continued to work on a revision to the VDOT Agreement for the project. Coordinated with Arlington Engineering staff to get an updated cost estimate for the project. Answered design related questions from Arlington Engineering staff. Need National Park Service permits to conduct surveys.

Arlington Boulevard Trail
Identified small scale projects and began work on preliminary design and cost estimates. Can update BAC in October.

Arlington Boulevard Transportation Enhancement project
Continued work on required VDOT environmental documentation Began initial outreach to Fort Meyer.

Columbia Pike Parallel Bikeways
Began work on cost estimate and submitted sign draft of sign plan for showing destinations and distances for key intersections for the bicycle boulevard. Design for 12th Street side almost complete. Can update BAC in October.

Rosslyn Circle Trail/Sidewalk Improvements
Coordinated with VDOT Staff regarding funding for Rosslyn Circle improvements and the VDOT agreement for design and construction of the improvements Continued to assist Arlington Staff with preparing an RFP for the Rosslyn Esplanade/Rosslyn Circle design. VDOT has $1 million funding, agreement soon. Tunnel is on hold. Eliminate lane on Lee Hwy? Dedicated signal phase for ped/bike crossing of Lynn St?

Bike Lane and Other Bikeway projects
Assisted with design of bike lane and shared use markings for the Williamsburg Circle.

(compilation 8/5/08 -- Accuracy suspect!)

==============================================

Agenda for October:  First Draft

Arlington Bicycle Advisory Committee
October 6, 2008 7:30 PM
Azalea Room 103 - Courthouse Plaza

Agenda

1.  Introductions and approval of minutes                (7:30 We try to start on time.)

2.  Trail maintenenace issues ­ Kevin Stalica
Includes slippery striping paint                               (7:40)

3.  County Board Bike Ride                                    (7:55)

4. BAC and staff priorities for new funding in FY 2010. (8:05)

5.  Pentagon Area Bicycle and Pedestrian Access Study (8:25)
           Identify relevant projects from the Arlington Bicycle Element
           as staff input to the 14th Street Bridge EIS and other relevant
           planning studies.

6.  Bicycle education in Arlington ­ where are we going? (8:45)

7. Update on County and Other projects Dave Goodman (9:15)
      Drawings for north end of Shirlington underpass
      Patton's progress
      Consultant activities  (Charlie Denney may be among us)
      Status of funded projects

8.  Regional issues and meetings Allen Muchnick     (9:25)

9.  Items for the November agenda

Adjourn by 9:30

Comments

So I read the whole linked document, and didn't find anything to corroborate Richard Moeur's contentions about bike lane widths or average speeds. The lane width one is really interesting, because what you see all the time is communities trying to shoehorn bike lanes in where there just isn't space for them. You see a lot of that in DC.

The speed limit thing sounds like an attempt to provide a scientific-sounding justification for a 15 mph limit on MUP's. The 85th percentile speed is a recognized standard for setting motor vehicle speeds. But it makes no sense on a couple of fronts. First, only on rare occasions do cyclists limit their speed from safety concerns. Usually level of effort is the limiting factor. Second, the 85th percentile has to be applied to a specific section of a specific road -- it can't just be applied to a blanket category of roads.

I do see a number of good changes in the MUTCD. They seem to have settled on a design for bike lanes with right turn only lanes -- outside. They've settled the issue of bike lanes at rotaries -- never (take that Thomas Circle).

Some bad points: they continue to refuse to accept that sharrows are used to get cyclists and motorists to share the lane, not to get cyclists out of the lane. Also, the discussion of right-of-way when roads cross trails neglects to mention that deference has to be given to state law; some states (including DC, VA, MD) and the uniform vehicle code always give right-of-way to pedestrians and cyclists in a crosswalk, unless a light signal is present. (I assume that's what Moeur meant by "static signals.")

[Contrarian]

Oops, last comment was mine, forgot to sign it. So I'll throw in another for free.

Clearly, the recent "improvements" on the Capital Crescent Trail violate the MUTCD. These standards are legally binding upon state governments, and I have heard of cases where cyclists have successfully sued states to force them to follow the MUTCD. What I don't know is whether the standards are legally binding on all state agencies, or just the DOT. I think a big part of the problem with the CCT is that the signs were put up by recreation officials with no traffic expertise.

[Allen Muchnick]

As usual, these draft Arlington BAC meeting notes have not been corrected or adopted. I attended this meeting, and I don't even understand much of the content Typically, such notes contain so many inaccuracies that it's not worth bothering to suggest corrections, especially when the suggested corrections never get incorporated.

As one example, the reported bikeway design guidelines are supposed to be hard minimums, not recommended installations.

[washcycle]

Yeah, I don't go to the meetings, and if I wait for the final notes it's all way out of date. I should put that in the header though.

[Jack Cochrane]

12' combined width for a bike lane + adjacent street parking is not enough! (unless nobody ever parks there)

[Contrarian]

Jack is right. There is an awful lot of wishful thinking that goes on with road planners when it comes to bike facilities and the amount of space they require. The MUTCD enables this kind of wishful thinking by giving a stamp of approval to designs that are just not workable.

For an even more egregious example, look at section of the manual on how to stripe when an obstruction blocks the bike lane. The depth of the ridiculousness of this is truly staggering. Is there a standard striping for when a road is obstructed? No, they just don't build roads that way. Yet somehow it is felt that it's OK to build bike lanes with obstructions, cyclists will just deal somehow.

As cycling advocates we have to be constantly vigilant for this kind of nonsense and be prepared to fight it. I firmly believe that substandard facilities are worse then no facilities at all, and when the amount of pavement available allows for only substandard facilities, no facility should be built. Unfortunately, the advocacy groups in the region take the tack that any facility, no matter how ill-advised, is a victory. So we get things like the Thomas Circle bike lanes, celebrated by WABA as an accomplishment, even though they directly contravene even the the watered down standards of the MUTCD.