Has anyone ever suggested that the NPS adopt the Lake Shore Drive solution?

by Adam on Jul 2, 2008 12:51 pm • link • report

One safety measure I WOULD like to see is those brown traffic signs changed to green ones. The brown is FAR harder to read at twilight or at night.

by FourthandEye on Jul 2, 2008 1:27 pm • link • report

Why is it that the Post article did not seem to account for increased population and expanded areas of business in downtown DC? Unlike Philadelphia, one of the cities mentioned in Adam's comment, which created 676 as an efficient means of getting across town, there is no equivalent in DC, and none planned of which I'm aware. (And I'd be pleasantly surprised if there were, as I'm unaware of finances available for such a project.)

Your comments about people feeling more comfortable because of wider ramps does not address the question of speed on the main part of the road. There are a number of miles between ramps, and, as they stand, the ramps are of poor design, in my opinion. They offer little to no merge areas (with the exception being the one that joins the road at Rosslyn), making people stop on the ramps or have a difficult time merging, or both. But once on the road, especially in the stretches that are miles between ramps, how do the ramps' width affect the overall speed?

by 10lbs on Jul 2, 2008 1:42 pm • link • report

With all due respect, I would humbly suggest that there isn't anything wrong with the road. The premises for the argument that there is a problem (more people use the road than planned and the average speed is 30% higher than the posted limit) can be asserted for almost every road.

The fact that the driving population and the density in the area has gone up should be addressed with mass transit. And frankly speed limits are pretty arbitrary. They don't take into account the myriad of active auto safety advances in the past 5 decades or so (like radial tires, disc brakes and such).

by Citizen Z. on Jul 2, 2008 1:59 pm • link • report

Citizen Z is right; invest in more mass transit options, not wider roads.

by Bianchi on Jul 2, 2008 2:10 pm • link • report

I would favor mass transit, too, but as fas as I know, a Potomac River line has never been proposed. If one were, the big problem would be NIMBY, I'd guess: those neighborhoods (Bellvue Forest, Country Club, Chesterbrook, Langley) are stuffed to the gills with cul-de-sac McMansions, which usually translates into opposition to transit-oriented growth.

by Tom Veil on Jul 2, 2008 2:23 pm • link • report

At least part of the fixes proposed includes widening the bike/pedestrian lanes across the humpback bridge.

I think they should widen the path underneath the Memorial Bridge, by narrowing the vehicle travel lanes. The path there is narrow enough that it's effectively only a single lane.

by Michael on Jul 2, 2008 2:56 pm • link • report

There are potentially two issues here. One is expanding capacity of the Parkway. The other is making what's there already safer. It seems like longer merge lanes and the like are in the latter category and long overdue.

In addition to the issues being addressed by the Humpback Bridge project, the lane drop at Chain Bridge Road going south needs to be fixed. There's no warning of the lane drop until it happens (the "Thru Traffic Keep Left" sign doesn't suggest that the right lane actually disappears).

by Another Adam on Jul 2, 2008 3:15 pm • link • report

I was thinking of a transit solution at first, as Citizen Z and Bianchi suggest, but the road is built specifically to be in a park (thus the name, I suppose) and therefore not able to justify -- or even allow -- the type of development around transit stations that we generally desire. Also at issue is the fact that, ideally, we'd want to preserve the park. I suppose, though, that the fact that we're even discussing the possibility of widening the road indicates that we don't much care for that aspect.

Now that I think about it, some sort of commuter-light rail hybrid might make sense for the corridor (commuter in that it has few stops, light in that its capacity is lower/runs in the street). My idea here is this: Lay tracks in the innermost lanes (1 in either direction), closing those lanes to automotive traffic (my doppelganger's point about the lane drop notwithstanding -- that would need to be fixed, certainly). The resulting line would run from Rosslyn to the Beltway, possibly with an intermediate stop at Langley/Chain Bridge.

Who knows, maybe this corridor is actually better for dedicated-lane express bus. Infrastructure costs would certainly be much lower.

Just a few random ruminations, take them as you will.

by Adam on Jul 2, 2008 3:58 pm • link • report

Ah, America - where we park on the driveway and drive on the parkway.

I don't know that there's a good transit corridor here - and if there is, it's probably a bus one. The big transportation need it serves is basically connecting the beltway to Rosslyn. From that, it passes by the CIA, but there really aren't any other trip generators there - nor a good anchor destination once you get to the beltway.

by Alex B. on Jul 2, 2008 4:12 pm • link • report

Good transit servicing the region and in places other than on the GW parkway would reduce demand for driving on the parkway. People are trying to get somewhere and choosing the parkway because it's the best option. More transit options will reduce driving demand. But then again, why not have transit on the parkway? Why should the priviledge of enjoying the park be open only to those who travel by car? It is a public park afterall.

by Bianchi on Jul 2, 2008 4:24 pm • link • report

The way to address excessive speeding on National Park Service parkways is with speed cameras. Sure-fire tickets will modify driver behavior over time and the Park Service should get the revenue. I assume that NPS spends a disproportionate amount of its Capital Region parks budget on maintaining the parkways -- essentially what a state transportation department would do -- rather than on more park-related maintenance and programs. So speeding cameras would lower speed limits and provide much-needed revenue for the parks. Frankly, NPS should adopt an Easy Pass or congestion pricing model and charge for using the George Washington and Rock Creek/Potomac Parkways.

by Rick on Jul 2, 2008 6:46 pm • link • report

Leave the Parkway as it is. My suggestion would be to take a light rail, say, the proposed line that would end at Woodley Park, bring it though Cathedral, Glover Park, and Palisades, across the Chain Bridge, and then along Dolley Madison Boulevard to Tyson's Corner. A tall order, considering that the rich folks of that area probably don't want a train line running down their street, but hey, it would do most of the trick.

by Dave Murphy on Jul 2, 2008 7:41 pm • link • report

Why does the Park Service manage a "parkway" at all? Who rounds up Wally and the Beav to get in dad's Buick for a family drive anymore?

The whole concept is outdated.

Let VDOT take it over & make both road/transit improvements to it.

by jd on Jul 2, 2008 8:28 pm • link • report