 |
Mount Pleasant DC Forum
Discussion about the Mount Pleasant Neighborhood
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Subcity
Joined: 17 Mar 2010
Posts: 190
|
 Posted: Thu Feb 17, 2011 6:44 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| Harry wrote: | | Subcity- I go through that intersection daily. I've looked at the plans. And I'm not sure I see what it is that has spurred you to spend so much time on this matter. The intersection is WAY over due for an overhaul. People have been dying to turn left from Kenyon to adams mill for ages, and most people make dangerous illegal left turns as it is. The jersey barriers need to go and the sidewalks need improvements. What is your major beef here? Do you really think traffic is going to grind to a halt? I don't. And if it does increase by some minute amount. Who cares? It's for the greater good. |
Harry, the greater good, as you say, can be served without reducing the traffic throughput by almost 50%.
Jack, in his way that he describes as "scientific", not political, asserts that a 1-lane road can carry as much traffic as a 2-lane road, as long as the 1-lane road splits into 2 just before an intersection. If that were true, traffic on the Beltway would be no problem at all.
BTW, the number of times I drive southbound on Adams Mill (from Park Rd.) and turn right, down to the zoo - at most, 1/year. So, the way that DDOT has screwed up that part is not a problem for me as someone who drives a car. However, it is a problem for me as a resident/taxpayer/arguably sentient being. What they've done there, and elsewhere, is to essentially say (1) DDOT wants two exclusive, segregated bike lanes, and then (2) DDOT will divide up whatever's left and give that non-exclusively to motorized vehicles - demand be damned.
Overall, I'm suspect about the actual design configuration because, among other things - and no one has yet explained this oddness - the measurements in the plans are wrong, most obviously the dimensions of Kenyon. Kenyon has a northside parking "lane", yet the drawings don't show it. What they show is off by maybe 20%.
If an architect did plans for your new house and the walls were shown 20% too short - 6.4' versus 8' - would you simply ignore that or maybe just point out the oversight and assume the rest was fine, or would it make you wonder about that architect's competency? I'm in the latter category.
Yeh, yeh, yeh, we all want that left-turn configuration resolved, but DDOT has bootstrapped that important item to do a bunch of other stuff that is, at best, questionable. They're using a corollary of Rahm Emanuel's "A crisis is a terrible thing to waste."
Jack says that biking up the hill from the zoo is a struggle (I agree), but do these plans enhance safety for bikers by requiring them to crisscross with motorized vehicles that want to turn right onto Irving? Yeh, I know, they do that now. But that's now, when there's no DDOT "plan" in place for bikes. If DDOT thinks it's good to require bikes to crisscross with motorized vehicles that will be turning right onto Irving, then what's wrong with bikes also crisscrossing with those headed up to eastbound Kenyon?
IIRC, bike riders on the road are supposed to obey traffic regulations. What are the "rules" that apply to cyclists wanting to head northbound on Adams Mill and to motorized vehicles heading up Kenyon? Is it Alphonse and Gaston? I assume motorized vehicles are supposed to yield, just as right-turning vehicles are supposed to yield to bikes going straight ahead. But here, DDOT's plan sets up an absurd, direct conflict between cars/trucks going straight up Kenyon (according to the arrows on the plan, "straight" takes you to Kenyon) and bikes turning left (again, according to the arrows on the plan, "left" takes you to Adams Mill).
DDOT wants bikes turning left to start out in a location to the right of cars/trucks going straight - then 5-4-3-2-1, the light turns green for everyone! Really? Seems so. Apart from the very real dangers to people that this design poses, better bump up DDOT's litigation fund. (I have seen this bikes-turning-left-from-the-right work fine in Europe, but only when traffic lights control bikes and cars separately - i.e., red light for cars while there's a left-turn green light for bikes.)
And so, cars/trucks going straight should/must yield to bikes turning left. Is this truly an enhanced safety situation for cyclists versus the current configuration?
You might also look at what the "plan" proposes for bikes turning right, up Irving. According to the plan, ALL bikes coming up Adams Mill from the zoo are explicitly directed to the center/bike lane. Bikes turning right then must crisscross cars and trucks turning right to get into the bike lane on the right side of Irving. That is what the plan indicates. (Yes, bikes may also use lanes designated for cars/trucks. Yet commingling is the supposedly inherently dangerous situation segregated bikes lanes are intended to resolve. So, stick to those bike lanes, bikers. Those fine people at DDOT and their contractors know best. At least on paper. Some say, anyway. Screw it, we just want our left turn from Kenyon! Yeh!)
Additionally, Kenyon-bound cars will have to wait at the stop line for those cyclists heading northbound on Adams Mill, thus substantially slowing traffic overall.
Might - again, might - it be better even for cyclists to join the rest of the traffic at the intersection so that ALL traffic heading up Adams Mill would be in the left lane and ALL traffic heading up Kenyon or Irving would be in the right lane?
And if you're thinking this really won't be much of a problem because, after all, there aren't that many cyclists... Hello?
But if, in a "Field of Dreams" scenario, lots of bike traffic does ensue, then even just 1 Kenyon-bound car/truck at the front of the line would block ALL car/truck/bus traffic until ALL of the then-substantial Adams Mill bike traffic passed. Since the Kenyon-bound car/truck would have to stay stopped at the stop line so as to not interfere with the procession of bikes, only 1 motorized vehicle would be able to get through the intersection on that "cycle" of the lights - and, even so, would have to cheat a bit to make that happen, assuming the bike traffic would stop on YELLOW. (Do cyclists even stop on RED if there are no cars coming?) In a "do the math" sorta way, do the geometry/time & motion.
Looking at plans for, and the actual execution of, DDOT lane designs makes me think they believe they're designing a kid's board game or a slot-car track, not actual streets. You ever head up Harvard Street to 18th Street and see the nice, precise chicane DDOT painted? Quaint, yet real-life absurd. (And yet, for around 10 years or so they've been unwilling to paint lane lines on the 1300 block of Irving; not even since they repaved it. Unless it's been done in the past 2 weeks. And I've never seen any attempt to configure any sort of logical lane markings for streets that have alternate-side parking rules on certain days; so on those days, a 2-lane road becomes a wide free-for-all single lane road.)
And not-so-BTW, the redesign of the traffic flow around the zoo entrance at Adams Mill has its own set of absurdities - which, of course, is important if you want to exit Beach Drive to northbound Adams Mill. But, I'll stick here to detailing the Kenyon problems.
In any event, more details below. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Harry
Joined: 22 Jan 2010
Posts: 119
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 08, 2012 9:42 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Jack-I see some construction equipment at the intersection. Could it be that the time has finally come? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jack
Joined: 23 Mar 2004
Posts: 4399
Location: 19th & Lamont
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 08, 2012 10:57 am Post subject: Kenyon/Adams Mill/Irving intersection |
|
|
| Harry wrote: | | Jack-I see some construction equipment at the intersection. Could it be that the time has finally come? |
I wish! No, that's some gas line work. Actual work on the intersection is now hoped to begin in May. -- Jack |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jack
Joined: 23 Mar 2004
Posts: 4399
Location: 19th & Lamont
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 27, 2012 3:42 pm Post subject: Kenyon/Adams Mill/Irving intersection |
|
|
Getting close! -- Jack
District Department of Transportation (DDOT)
DCKA-2011-B-0178 Harvard Triangle Intersections Improvement
Closing Date: April 10, 2012
(DBE: 12%)
New! Pre-Bid Meeting: Thursday March 29, 2012 10:00AM
3rd Floor Conference Room, Reeves Center, 2000 14th Street NW (see attachment)
Construction, Street (Major and Residential) (Includes Reconstruction)
Work Site: Adams Mill Road, Kenyon/Irving Streets, Harvard Street NW
Solicitation documents are available at 2000 14th Street, N.W., 3rd Floor OCP Bid Room and may be examined at the DDOT Business Opportunity and Workforce Development Center, 2311 Martin Luther King Jr. Avenue SE during business hours (please call 202-645-8620 first).
For more information including solicitation document and amendments, visit the website:
http://app.ocp.dc.gov/RUI/information/scf/solicitation_detail.asp?solicitation=DCKA-2011-B-0178 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Harry
Joined: 22 Jan 2010
Posts: 119
|
| Posted: Fri May 04, 2012 9:51 am Post subject: |
|
|
So is it still on track to break ground this month Jack? (Was wondering yesterday as I took my illegal left turn...)
Can't wait to give those jersey barriers the boot too. It is still so insane to me that the city couldn't send a crew out to put a sidewalk there sooner. Would have taken the same amount of time to put a sidewalk there as it did to place to stupid wall. Patch fixes in pedestrian infrastructure as glaring as that, heavily traveled by senior citizens no less!, should take priority over the cosmetic street-scapes going on all over town. It's half a days work. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jack
Joined: 23 Mar 2004
Posts: 4399
Location: 19th & Lamont
|
| Posted: Fri May 04, 2012 10:03 am Post subject: Kenyon/Adams Mill/Irving intersection |
|
|
| Harry wrote: | So is it still on track to break ground this month Jack? (Was wondering yesterday as I took my illegal left turn...)
Can't wait to give those jersey barriers the boot too. It is still so insane to me that the city couldn't send a crew out to put a sidewalk there sooner. Would have taken the same amount of time to put a sidewalk there as it did to place to stupid wall. Patch fixes in pedestrian infrastructure as glaring as that, heavily traveled by senior citizens no less!, should take priority over the cosmetic street-scapes going on all over town. It's half a days work. |
Making progress, but ever so slowly . . . June, maybe July. But it's coming, no doubt about that! -- Jack |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Harry
Joined: 22 Jan 2010
Posts: 119
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 16, 2012 11:29 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Do I hear September? Can I get an October? Or did you mean July 2013? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jack
Joined: 23 Mar 2004
Posts: 4399
Location: 19th & Lamont
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 16, 2012 12:30 pm Post subject: Kenyon/Adams Mill/Irving intersection |
|
|
| Harry wrote: | | Do I hear September? Can I get an October? Or did you mean July 2013? |
Ought to be closer than that. The "pre-construction meeting" was held August 9. DDOT has asked for advice concerning temporary office space nearby. But not yet is there a start date. -- Jack |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jack
Joined: 23 Mar 2004
Posts: 4399
Location: 19th & Lamont
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 14, 2012 10:03 am Post subject: Kenyon/Adams Mill/Irving intersection |
|
|
Work will begin in early October. DDOT has set up a web site for community information, though at the moment it's little more than a blank slate:
http://harvardtriangleproject.com/
I've asked the administrator here to set up a forum specifically for dialog with the managers of the project.
-- Jack |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Harry
Joined: 22 Jan 2010
Posts: 119
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 19, 2013 3:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Hey Jack- overall I'm happy with the redesign and that work is finally underway after years of promises. But. I noticed this weekend that the crew seems to be erecting a new permanent jersey barrier that will separate traffic lanes between Harvard and Kenyon on Adams Mill. I don't really understand why this is needed. I know I have a well documented disdain for jersey barriers. But really. why is the necessary? This is supposed to be a quaint historic neighborhood nestled in rock creek park. Or at least thats how we like to bill ourselves. Jersey barriers to me encourage speeding and are equated them with car-first infrastructure. Im sure it's too late to stop them just wondering what the reasoning is? Also I'm wondering if the work being done by the zoo entrance will include a path to rockcreek parkway and a crosswalk to access the trail on the other side. This was an issue in the past with joggers being hit by cars trying to access the trail when the zoo closes the gates on their bridge.
In general, as i've voiced before, I find out neighborhood has horrible access to the park despite being immediate neighbors. How can we advocate for sidewalks on park road down to pierce mill? Pedestrian bridges across the parkway to the trail? Can we slow the speeds on Porter/klingle without fines by planting a tree lined median. adding a sidewalk on the opposite side by the mural? etc etc etc. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jack
Joined: 23 Mar 2004
Posts: 4399
Location: 19th & Lamont
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 20, 2013 10:51 am Post subject: Adams Mill Road, between Kenyon and Harvard |
|
|
| Harry wrote: | | Hey Jack- overall I'm happy with the redesign and that work is finally underway after years of promises. But. I noticed this weekend that the crew seems to be erecting a new permanent jersey barrier that will separate traffic lanes between Harvard and Kenyon on Adams Mill. I don't really understand why this is needed. I know I have a well documented disdain for jersey barriers. But really. why is the necessary? This is supposed to be a quaint historic neighborhood nestled in rock creek park. Or at least thats how we like to bill ourselves. Jersey barriers to me encourage speeding and are equated them with car-first infrastructure. Im sure it's too late to stop them just wondering what the reasoning is? |
There was plenty of consternation about that dreadful jersey wall structure. Residents had asked for something esthetically pleasing, and DDOT had agreed to that, but then reversed course. The argument is that the shape of jersey wall deflects vehicles back onto the roadway, and is thus safer than other shapes.
Attached, the DDOT memo explaining the reasoning behind that awful barrier. It's hard to argue with safety.
| Harry wrote: | | Also I'm wondering if the work being done by the zoo entrance will include a path to rockcreek parkway and a crosswalk to access the trail on the other side. This was an issue in the past with joggers being hit by cars trying to access the trail when the zoo closes the gates on their bridge. |
Nope. I've had to do the run across Beach Drive many, many times, whenever that stupid Zoo gate is closed.
| Harry wrote: | | In general, as i've voiced before, I find out neighborhood has horrible access to the park despite being immediate neighbors. How can we advocate for sidewalks on park road down to pierce mill? Pedestrian bridges across the parkway to the trail? Can we slow the speeds on Porter/klingle without fines by planting a tree lined median. adding a sidewalk on the opposite side by the mural? etc etc etc. |
Been there, done that. Yes, our access to RCP is dreadful. I do the Zoo cut-through on my bicycle, and that's gotten difficult lately, because of the construction work. Park Road would be nice, but the National Park Service simply will not permit widening of Park Road to permit a sidewalk or bike lane.
Re Klingle/Porter, lately I've been using that, given the problems on Adams Mill Road and Zoo access. No fun, for sure. That whole crossover should be redesigned to provide for pedestrians and bicycles. There's no need for two westbound lanes, so one lane on the north side could be converted to sidewalk and bike path.
The problem here is getting enough public support for such a project, which would not be cheap. I think I need to talk to the Cleveland Park ANC folks, because half the road is on their side. I'm sure Mary Cheh would be supportive. Jim Graham would need to see some sign that the Mount Pleasant public would be substantially in favor. Of course, anything that tends to crimp automobile traffic encounters opposition. So we've got to show that there are enough bicyclists and pedestrians in support that it's politically favorable.
Safety would be an issue, crossing the ramp to Beach Drive, which sees a lot of traffic from both sides of the park.
-- Jack |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Subcity
Joined: 17 Mar 2010
Posts: 190
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 25, 2013 2:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
This is "funny" -- in a Black Comedy kind of way.
I've posted numerously on how this project creates an unsafe situation. And now it seems even DDOT sees this to be true:
From this doc: "Harvard Triangle-Median wall Memo to DDOT 2013-01-29": "But both the north bound and south bound lanes are narrow and on a curve and with significant grades. In such a road the chance of casual collision is high."
That's great stuff for a lawyer when the bike-car-collision litigation commences: DDOT admits it is creating a situation that is less safe than before.
And so they are reconstructing a road that increases the probability of collisions. Then to mitigate that, they are using a Jersey Wall. OK.
But still, what about bikes and motor vehicles heading in the same direction? As DDOT notes, the "lanes are narrow and on a curve and with significant grades." Seems to me - and I predicted this in posts long ago - that this project increases the danger for cyclists.
There is simply not enough room - i.e., width of roadbed - for the way this project has been designed. The only way to have made it safe would have been to widen things by made 5-10 feet.
That new left turn from Kenyon will be just dandy, but the cost is high.
And once again, we have a project in which no one seems to give due consideration to collateral consequences. As if everything else stays the same and we just get this "new and better thing." If only the real world were so simple.
Or to put it another way, ya still can't cram 10 pounds of manure into a 5-pound manure bag.
[typo edits only]
Last edited by Subcity on Wed Feb 27, 2013 1:35 pm; edited 2 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Harry
Joined: 22 Jan 2010
Posts: 119
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 25, 2013 2:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
If the narrowness of the road is the issue why not remove the bike lanes and replace with "sharrows" like they have on Park Road? Cars should be encouraged to go slow there. Putting a jersey wall up encourages the opposite.
Agree with subcity in this case that the jersey wall may prevent car on car collisions but how does that bode for car on bikes as many drivers fear getting too close to jersey walls it seems they would be skirting the bike lane pretty close. This is a bogus last minute fix. Take down the jersey wall and put in sharrows. Im not sure I understand the need for the grade changes or any of this. Cars have been making illegal left turns there forever. All they had to do was soften the hard right and change the medians to allow for the left turns. I was happy to see a bike lane in the works and trusted there was room. But adding jersey walls to accommodate a bike lane that actually makes bikes LESS safe? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You cannot download files in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
