Frank, Jonathan, and all,
Try this source, which I haven't explored extensively tonight: http://www.railtrails.org/whatwedo/trailbuilding/technicalassistance/toolbox...
The Rails-to-Trails Conservancy (the root of the above url) is the national source for standards for railtrails. Like the LAB, they pull things together for an important special interest, even when they may not have the legal standing. So I expect they can send us to the best practices source.
Greg
Frank Gmeindl fgmeindl@verizon.net 7/9/2008 8:13 AM >>>
Jonathan,
I think we erred when we provided our recommendation to the Traffic Commission for the rail-trail striping and signs. We did not provide them an exact specification. In fact, when they discussed our recommendation they spent significant time discussing the width, length and spacing of the line and as I recall, concluded with specifications very similar to the guidance that you cite. Unfortunately, their meeting minutes captured none of that. Then, subsequently, the recommendation was handed off to BOPARC, probably with no guidance.
Do you think you could draft an exact specification for replacement of the current stripe exact traceability to AASHTO or MUTCD sections? If so, and if the Bicycle Board approved, I would present the specifications to the Traffic Commission. I recognize neither AASHTO nor MUTCD provides exact specifications but unless we provide exact specifications and justify them with reference to standards, this debacle will only worsen. I shudder to think what they might do with the Shared Lane Markings on the roadways!!!
Frank
Jonathan Rosenbaum wrote:
On my spying mission today at the Bicycle Parking meeting, I learned from an unnamed source - David ;) - that also BOPARC was upset to discover the striping when they came back from their vacation. Apparently Lyle Mathews from the Signs and Signals Division of Morgantown applied the striping during this time period. This doesn't explain the whole story, but at least we have a better picture of who was involved.
I want to add that unlike what Gunnar is insinuating it's really not just an issue of cyclists being fixated on the stripes (although it's hard not to be if you happen to have peripheral vision), failing to look at scenery, or even a speed issue. (Should we have installed traffic calming speed bumps or narrowed the trail?) Apparently many pedestrians and skaters are not happy with the situation either. As for bicyclists, if you are scanning and looking far ahead as you should be doing, people in the distance are now less visible than they were prior to the change.
-Jonathan
gunn4r Shogren wrote:
Overheard as Betsy and I passed a small family the other day- "stay in your lane Emily so they can pass."
Too bad it is- Not centered. Not just in the congested areas. Strangely wavy, though hardly producing a "dizzying" effect unless you're really fixated on it I suppose.
I don't think that it is- A problem for cyclists identifying folks in the other direction unless they themselves are going too fast on the rail-trail and/or fixated on the stripes (look around, enjoy the scenery...).
Would be interesting to learn how it went from our recommendation to their implementation though.
On 7/8/08, Jonathan Rosenbaum freesource@cheat.org wrote:
I studied the rail-trail changes about 9 hours ago and here are the results of my study.
I see no mention of the total numbers of "stripes". I think we really need that number please.
:)
1). The striped lines begin at 4th Street on the Caperton Trail and continue to the kiosk which is right before where the trail turns into gravel.
2). The stripped lines start at the beginning of Deckers Creek Trail and continue all the way to the intersection with Deckers Creek Rd.
3). In general, the stripes are not properly centered in the trail, this leaves more room on one side of the trail than on the other side. Also, the ends of the stripes are not always perpendicular to one another creating a wavy effect.
4). The stripes are not trail appropriate, but rather are similar to the ones designated for highways. There are approximately 10 feet long and about 4 inches wide. (note: This is a just an estimate.) The MUTCD recommends stripes that are 3 feet long for shared-use paths ([Section 9B.01] or in the newest MUTCD [Section 9C.03]).
5). The stripes are spaced approximately 10 feet apart from each other. The MUTCD recommends a 1-to-3 segment-to-gap ratio. Given the present stripe size that would be 30 feet, however, if the trail was appropriately striped that would be 9 feet.
6). The stripes are white, but both the MUTCD and the AASHTO recommend a "100-mm (4-inch) wide "yellow" center line stripe to separate opposite directions of travel (from AASHTO)".
Summary: The biggest problem with the way the stripes were applied is that they are not appropriate stripes for a rail-trail and they are too close together based on their length. No wonder people are complaining about getting dizzy. Also, the intention of these stripes was to provide feedback to people in congested areas to stay to the right, not to make the rail-trail look like a very weird 70 mph freeway. Furthermore, because the stripes weren't properly centered people tend to walk towards the center on the less wide side. AASHTO provides a good explanation of what we wanted to accomplish:
A designer should consider a 100-mm (4-inch) wide yellow center line stripe to separate opposite directions of travel. This stripe should be broken where adequate passing sight distance exists, and solid in other locations, or where passing by bicycles should be discouraged. This may be particularly beneficial in the following circumstances: (1) for heavy volumes of bicycles and/or other users, (2) on curves with restricted sight distance, and (3) on unlighted paths where nighttime riding is expected. White edge lines can also be very beneficial where bicycle traffic is expected during early evening hours. Did we accomplish this goal? Based on my real-world experience of riding on the trail today I was appalled. Because of BOPARC's attempt at reinventing the wheel, we have created a situation that actually makes it harder for a bicyclist to adequately identify travelers coming from the opposite direction because of the distraction that the striped lines create; i.e. this is a less safe situation. Furthermore, it was my understanding that these stripes were only going to be placed in congested areas, and augmented by signage.
I am not sure how to finish this message, but I think this indicates some serious problems with the communication channels that exist in this City. You would have thought that BOPARC would have know the appropriate application to use on a rail-trail, and they would have asked or have been told what application to use if they didn't know, but this certainly doesn't seem to be the case. I am looking forward to learning more information about what went wrong from those who know, so we won't have a repeat of this in the future!
-Jonathan
Jonathan Rosenbaum wrote: Yes, this was presented to the TC on June 13, 2007. I've attached the file that describes the outcome of this TC meeting, look at (4). I haven't been on the rail trail since the change occurred. Did they put strips in congested areas as we recommended, or did they strip the whole rail trail?
-Jonathan
Greg Good wrote:
Does anyone have a record that the BB recommended to the Traffic Commission a center line on the railtrail? I cannot find any such recommendation in my records, but perhaps I am missing some files.
Background: center lines have appeared and one citizen has been told that this was the call of the BB. I doubt this and I want the record to be clear.
Greg
Bikeboard mailing list Bikeboard@cheat.org http://cheat.org/mailman/listinfo/bikeboard
Bikeboard mailing list Bikeboard@cheat.org http://cheat.org/mailman/listinfo/bikeboard
Bikeboard mailing list Bikeboard@cheat.org http://cheat.org/mailman/listinfo/bikeboard
Bikeboard mailing list Bikeboard@cheat.org http://cheat.org/mailman/listinfo/bikeboard