Fairfax greasing the chain

Bicycling

Fairfax greasing the chain

by Douglas Stewart • October 8, 2009 2:54 pm

Earlier this week Fairfax County took the first step toward a bicycle master plan. The County Board of Supervisors approved a motion by Supervisor Jeff McKay directing the staff to study the development of a bicycle plan and provide recommendations for funding and creating the plan.

Photo by the author.

Fairfax County currently has very few bicycle projects in its countywide transportation plan. Less than 2 percent of the funds in VDOT's Six-Year Transportation Improvement Program for Northern Virginia are for bicycle and pedestrian improvements. If it is not in these plans, it will not get built.

Washington DC approved a bicycle master plan in 2005. Bicycle projects are now integrated in the city's transportation plan, guiding decisions about design and funding for projects. Bicycle use in the city has soared. Without the plan, many bicycle projects would not have gotten into the city's funding and construction pipeline. The bicycle master plan took a lot of work, and some money. But it is paying off.

With the budget constraints, Fairfax County cannot fund a bicycle planning effort. But the approval of a study of a bike plan greases the chain for a bicycle planning process when funding gets less tight. Fairfax Advocates for Better Bicycling, which has been campaigning for a bicycle master plan, recognized this and worked with Supervisor McKay to get the process started. The District of Columbia used crack consultants to do their bicycle master plan, and the high quality and precision of their work surely has helped legitimize the plan and get it implemented. Still, the county might want to consider getting started with the resources it already has and not wait too long before beginning the plan. Despite the incessant hand-wringing about Virginia's transportation woes, new money for transportation is coming within the next couple years through the federal transportation reauthorization. We need to be prepared with specific bicycle and pedestrian projects to take advantage of the opportunities.

9 comments

Tags: bicycling, Fairfax, VDOT

Fairfax needs a street grid, but more than an island (Aug 4, 2009)
Fairfax residents: Call or email your supervisors (Feb 22, 2010)
Crossing the street often unsafe in Fairfax (Nov 12, 2009)
Bike and ped safety fund is back, but will it survive? (Mar 31, 2009)
Maryland, Fairfax, Alexandria take steps toward needed WMATA funding (Mar 11, 2010)

Douglas Stewart is a nonprofit consultant and smart growth advocate in Fairfax County. He also writes about land use and transportation issues at Fairfax Suburbanista. Douglas has worked on land use and transportation reform since 1999, most recently as development and communications director with 1000 Friends of Maryland.

Comments
Add a comment »

timely you mentioned this - I'm beginning my Architecture thesis and it VERY much has to do with suburban recreational trail connectivity in Fairfax City. All the most successful suburban nodes of pedestrian activity and community happen along recreational trails. Consider Falls Church, Vienna, Reston, Herndon; all along the W&OD and all the only "alive" successful pockets of pedestrian activity in the NOVA burbs. Fairfax County's Cross County Trail can serve to expand on this, with the missing lynch pin being where the Difficult Run and Accotink Creek parts of the CCT hit Fairfax City. and that's where I'm picking up.

Thanks for the info Douglas

by stevek_fairfax on Oct 8, 2009 4:26 pm • link • report

Douglas: reading your post makes me a little better about where things stand re: bike infrastructure in MoCo. At least we have a bike master plan! -- Casey

by Casey Anderson on Oct 8, 2009 4:52 pm • link • report

Fairfax can start by fixing up the continuity of existing bike paths. For in stance here:

http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=silverbrook+rd,+lorton+va&sll=39.738051,-75.586131&sspn=0.006575,0.011287&g=silverbrook+rd&ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=Silverbrook+Rd,+Lorton,+Fairfax,+Virginia&ll=38.728162,-77.257186&spn=0.000834,0.001411&t=h&z=20&layer=c&cbll=38.728091,-77.256721&panoid=Gnv7UAB7AXxi0Eik1m7yxQ&cbp=12,323.51,,0,5

This is on Silverbrook @ Bayberry. Zoom out a step and see what the problem is. Two clowns apparently refused to have the bike path go through their garden.

They could also make the Cross County Trail multi-use (=wider).

A large problem in the Lorton/South Springfield area is lack of connectivity. There are a lot of paths, but they are not connected, or worse, interrupted like above.

by Jasper on Oct 8, 2009 5:05 pm • link • report

Fairfax needs to get away from "side paths" like the one in that Google map, and start putting down bike lanes. The side paths are nothing but glorified sidewalks and have all the problems of sidewalk riding, which is neither safe nor practical.

by Scott on Oct 8, 2009 9:25 pm • link • report

I love that google map link, searching around that area of the map there were several other sections like that. MoCo has that kind of stuff everywhere too, and its a shame becasue in some places the bike paths are very nice, but only a mile long.

by Matt R on Oct 9, 2009 7:10 am • link • report

@ Scott, Matt R: You are both correct.

by Jasper on Oct 9, 2009 9:53 am • link • report

Wow, that has to be one of the "best" examples of bad bike/ped planning and engineering I've ever seen. The County needs to be called to the carpet for that. It should also be noted that it is an ADA violation.

by Bike/Ped Professional on Oct 9, 2009 11:51 am • link • report

Unfortunately there are many examples in Fairfax County of shared use paths that lead nowhere. All it takes is for one homeowner to refuse to grant or sell an easement to thwart a project. The county Board of Supervisors has rarely agreed to condemn property for shared use paths or sidewalks, although there are a few recent exceptions. That is one reason we need to make our roads more bike-friendly. We wouldn't think of creating roads that don't connect, and yet we've haven't figured out how to connect many of our trails and sidewalks.

Having a bicycle plan will provide a blueprint for creating more bike-friendly roads. In many cases lanes could be reduced in width to create wider outside lanes for bicyclists at little to no added cost. We need to assess our current road system and come up with a prioritized plan for implementation.

by Bruce Wright on Oct 10, 2009 10:52 am • link • report

The Fairfax situation mapped above is a calculated response by the county. The two properties are clearly developed below the Master Plan and await redevelopment at higher densities - just look at their lot sizes, their frontage, and their neighbors. The county will always wait for a development proposal and then require infill of the network - but if it takes 40 years it will take 40 years. Not a good approach, of course, but there are also examples of roadways that are four lanes, then two, then four - all awaiting a developer to widen the little stretch in front of their property. It is a larger problem that could be addressed.

by James on Oct 10, 2009 1:34 pm • link • report