New bike lane on Old Georgetown Rd in Bethesda

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Oh I am so excited about the bike lanes and plan to bike to work when the weather is nicer. I didn’t notice any impact on traffic Wednesday - certainly better than the construction. When I first saw them, it was such an exciting surprise. It will be great with the new Josiah Henson High School going in too. Sorry to learn about the lives that were lost to get here.

What do you consider "nice" weather. Too cold in the winter / too hot in the summer. Part of the problem is that we really don't have much "nice" weather.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

It sounds to me like you're very angry because a group of people out for a recreational bike ride inconvenienced you while you're driving. I'm sorry, that must be frustrating. Driving is very stressful. I'm glad that the county is moving towards alternatives, so that fewer people will be forced to drive everywhere for everything.

It seems like you’re having trouble making a coherent argument for not using the bike lanes. The OGR lanes are really nice. They’re wider than most and separated from traffic by pylons.

Sounds like you’re very angry because a pedestrian made you slow down on your bike and lose your momentum. I suggest squats or deadlifts to build up some more leg strength. For all of cyclists’ talk about how it’s relaxing they seem to be the tightest wound people on this board.

Have you used them? If not, please give them a try and report back.

Those "pylons" are called traffic delineators or plastic flex posts. You can drive right over them without any damage to your car.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Totally agree. No one wants anyone to get hurt but we have to face reality. Bikes and cars are not a good mix. Does it really matter whose fault that is? This is a case of caving to the minority at the expense of the majority. Especially since cyclists cannot start and stop the way cars can. Riding on the right side of large vehicles expecting to go straight when those vehicles may turn right is silly and to fault drivers for not having swivel heads because you cannot manage what is directly in front of you (at your personal choice) is truly ridiculous.

?????????????????

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The bike lanes are obviously a joke because they merge with the turn lane at Tuckermam but not at 495. Absolute performative nonsense that is intended to create congestion, except I guess if your coming from the mall and want to get to the Strathmore.

You all (meaning all of you drivers, complaining about the bike lanes) are really going to have to agree amongst yourselves about whether the bike lanes are or are not safe.

If they're not safe, that's on MDSHA, because there are federal guidelines on how to make bike lanes that are safe.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm sorry, but those bike lanes are making Old Georgetown a complete cluster f***. Doubled the length of my commute this morning.

They need to do bike lanes that do not take away lanes for cars. It's not a zero-sum game, they need to add without taking away something

I drive "against" the rush hour flow each day and it is bumper to bumper the rush hour direction, even with work at home and hybrid work. So backed up. (I get on the beltway, and spouse goes up 270, so no we are not swapping out bikes)

Today there was an ambulance with its lights and sirens blaring en route to Suburban Hospital...stuck behind so many cars with nowhere to pull over.

Guess what, with 2 packed lanes southbound, and two pack lanes northbound, there was no where to move out of the way. Without a doubt there will be delays getting to the hospital. Are the cars supposed to ride over the posts into the bike lane? Or the ambulance? This is not a scenic bike route, but a commuter artery and emergency vehicle artery (e.g., fire stations and the B-CC rescue squad) hours each day.
I wonder how long until one needs to study the life and death impact of those two clogged lanes, on emergencies.

I just drove down the entirety of OGR. There was not one bike on OGR using those lanes, not surprising due to heavy rain today. The traffic was not good and I think that these types of changes to transportation that impact so many people should be up to a vote on how people would like to utilize tax payer funded roads. Off of this road are 2 merges onto interstate highways, NIH and a major thoroughfare to downtown Bethesda with delivery and semi trucks and as a previous poster stated, a hospital. With 2 lanes now gone, 33% of OGR is unusable for cars. We now have 33% of a major road underutilized. I'm sorry but let's look at the people who need to use these roads who arent in the "special" bike category. Older people and people with mobility issues, families, people commuting to work who have no access to a locker room or a shower, people running errands with multiple bags, people who don't have bikes, and every other person out there who needs to use a car for whatever reason for which a bike will not suffice.

It is a tragedy to lose people to bike accidents or to any kind of accidents. It does not mean that society has to overhaul everything to prevent it from ever happening again. In 2021 there were 597,000 bicycle related brain injuries from people falling off of bikes, not exclusive to car accidents. Maybe we should ban bikes - sounds like we'd save a lot of pain and suffering and visits to the ER.

Totally agree. No one wants anyone to get hurt but we have to face reality. Bikes and cars are not a good mix. Does it really matter whose fault that is? This is a case of caving to the minority at the expense of the majority. Especially since cyclists cannot start and stop the way cars can. Riding on the right side of large vehicles expecting to go straight when those vehicles may turn right is silly and to fault drivers for not having swivel heads because you cannot manage what is directly in front of you (at your personal choice) is truly ridiculous.

So you are saying that if a car and a cyclist are riding next to each other then:
- The car is in front of the cyclist so of course he should see it; but
- It is inconceivable to expect the driver to look to his/ her right before turning because that would require that his head be on a "swivel"
- The cyclist is somehow to be "faulted" for choosing to bike but the driver does not have the same responsibility for choosing to drive a two ton machine that could kill someone

Seems just a wee bit contradictory.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

It sounds to me like you're very angry because a group of people out for a recreational bike ride inconvenienced you while you're driving. I'm sorry, that must be frustrating. Driving is very stressful. I'm glad that the county is moving towards alternatives, so that fewer people will be forced to drive everywhere for everything.

It seems like you’re having trouble making a coherent argument for not using the bike lanes. The OGR lanes are really nice. They’re wider than most and separated from traffic by pylons.

Sounds like you’re very angry because a pedestrian made you slow down on your bike and lose your momentum. I suggest squats or deadlifts to build up some more leg strength. For all of cyclists’ talk about how it’s relaxing they seem to be the tightest wound people on this board.

Have you used them? If not, please give them a try and report back.

Those "pylons" are called traffic delineators or plastic flex posts. You can drive right over them without any damage to your car.

I have. It’s great having a wide lane without cars in it and the “delineators or plastic flex posts” (sorry for not knowing the proper term) appear to do a great job signaling to car drivers that they should stay out of the bike lane. I haven’t encountered a single car on the wrong side of the flex posts.

All of these hazards you claim exist in the bike lanes are even worse in the other lanes, and then there are other hazards on top of that. I’m happy they did this and I ride more often now. If we want more bike lanes, we need to use the ones we have and stop making up reasons they’re hazardous.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Totally agree. No one wants anyone to get hurt but we have to face reality. Bikes and cars are not a good mix. Does it really matter whose fault that is? This is a case of caving to the minority at the expense of the majority. Especially since cyclists cannot start and stop the way cars can. Riding on the right side of large vehicles expecting to go straight when those vehicles may turn right is silly and to fault drivers for not having swivel heads because you cannot manage what is directly in front of you (at your personal choice) is truly ridiculous.

?????????????????

Sounds like someone needs to spend some time in the weight room.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Totally agree. No one wants anyone to get hurt but we have to face reality. Bikes and cars are not a good mix. Does it really matter whose fault that is? This is a case of caving to the minority at the expense of the majority. Especially since cyclists cannot start and stop the way cars can. Riding on the right side of large vehicles expecting to go straight when those vehicles may turn right is silly and to fault drivers for not having swivel heads because you cannot manage what is directly in front of you (at your personal choice) is truly ridiculous.

?????????????????

Sounds like someone needs to spend some time in the weight room.

I've ridden a bike for 50 years, driven a car for 40, and passed college physics, so I feel pretty confident saying that bicyclists can stop in less time with a shorter stopping distance.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm sorry, but those bike lanes are making Old Georgetown a complete cluster f***. Doubled the length of my commute this morning.

They need to do bike lanes that do not take away lanes for cars. It's not a zero-sum game, they need to add without taking away something

I drive "against" the rush hour flow each day and it is bumper to bumper the rush hour direction, even with work at home and hybrid work. So backed up. (I get on the beltway, and spouse goes up 270, so no we are not swapping out bikes)

Today there was an ambulance with its lights and sirens blaring en route to Suburban Hospital...stuck behind so many cars with nowhere to pull over.

Guess what, with 2 packed lanes southbound, and two pack lanes northbound, there was no where to move out of the way. Without a doubt there will be delays getting to the hospital. Are the cars supposed to ride over the posts into the bike lane? Or the ambulance? This is not a scenic bike route, but a commuter artery and emergency vehicle artery (e.g., fire stations and the B-CC rescue squad) hours each day.
I wonder how long until one needs to study the life and death impact of those two clogged lanes, on emergencies.

I just drove down the entirety of OGR. There was not one bike on OGR using those lanes, not surprising due to heavy rain today. The traffic was not good and I think that these types of changes to transportation that impact so many people should be up to a vote on how people would like to utilize tax payer funded roads. Off of this road are 2 merges onto interstate highways, NIH and a major thoroughfare to downtown Bethesda with delivery and semi trucks and as a previous poster stated, a hospital. With 2 lanes now gone, 33% of OGR is unusable for cars. We now have 33% of a major road underutilized. I'm sorry but let's look at the people who need to use these roads who arent in the "special" bike category. Older people and people with mobility issues, families, people commuting to work who have no access to a locker room or a shower, people running errands with multiple bags, people who don't have bikes, and every other person out there who needs to use a car for whatever reason for which a bike will not suffice.

It is a tragedy to lose people to bike accidents or to any kind of accidents. It does not mean that society has to overhaul everything to prevent it from ever happening again. In 2021 there were 597,000 bicycle related brain injuries from people falling off of bikes, not exclusive to car accidents. Maybe we should ban bikes - sounds like we'd save a lot of pain and suffering and visits to the ER.

Totally agree. No one wants anyone to get hurt but we have to face reality. Bikes and cars are not a good mix. Does it really matter whose fault that is? This is a case of caving to the minority at the expense of the majority. Especially since cyclists cannot start and stop the way cars can. Riding on the right side of large vehicles expecting to go straight when those vehicles may turn right is silly and to fault drivers for not having swivel heads because you cannot manage what is directly in front of you (at your personal choice) is truly ridiculous.

So you are saying that if a car and a cyclist are riding next to each other then:
- The car is in front of the cyclist so of course he should see it; but
- It is inconceivable to expect the driver to look to his/ her right before turning because that would require that his head be on a "swivel"
- The cyclist is somehow to be "faulted" for choosing to bike but the driver does not have the same responsibility for choosing to drive a two ton machine that could kill someone

Seems just a wee bit contradictory.

I mean, a right hook is in fact a known danger, when road departments put bike lanes to the right of general-travel lanes. The primary responsibility for safe bike lanes belongs to the road departments. People operating vehicles have a responsibility too, though. When you're turning, you must yield the right of way to people who are going straight. Drivers should have their heads on a swivel, even with no bike lanes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm sorry, but those bike lanes are making Old Georgetown a complete cluster f***. Doubled the length of my commute this morning.

They need to do bike lanes that do not take away lanes for cars. It's not a zero-sum game, they need to add without taking away something

I drive "against" the rush hour flow each day and it is bumper to bumper the rush hour direction, even with work at home and hybrid work. So backed up. (I get on the beltway, and spouse goes up 270, so no we are not swapping out bikes)

Today there was an ambulance with its lights and sirens blaring en route to Suburban Hospital...stuck behind so many cars with nowhere to pull over.

Guess what, with 2 packed lanes southbound, and two pack lanes northbound, there was no where to move out of the way. Without a doubt there will be delays getting to the hospital. Are the cars supposed to ride over the posts into the bike lane? Or the ambulance? This is not a scenic bike route, but a commuter artery and emergency vehicle artery (e.g., fire stations and the B-CC rescue squad) hours each day.
I wonder how long until one needs to study the life and death impact of those two clogged lanes, on emergencies.

I just drove down the entirety of OGR. There was not one bike on OGR using those lanes, not surprising due to heavy rain today. The traffic was not good and I think that these types of changes to transportation that impact so many people should be up to a vote on how people would like to utilize tax payer funded roads. Off of this road are 2 merges onto interstate highways, NIH and a major thoroughfare to downtown Bethesda with delivery and semi trucks and as a previous poster stated, a hospital. With 2 lanes now gone, 33% of OGR is unusable for cars. We now have 33% of a major road underutilized. I'm sorry but let's look at the people who need to use these roads who arent in the "special" bike category. Older people and people with mobility issues, families, people commuting to work who have no access to a locker room or a shower, people running errands with multiple bags, people who don't have bikes, and every other person out there who needs to use a car for whatever reason for which a bike will not suffice.

It is a tragedy to lose people to bike accidents or to any kind of accidents. It does not mean that society has to overhaul everything to prevent it from ever happening again. In 2021 there were 597,000 bicycle related brain injuries from people falling off of bikes, not exclusive to car accidents. Maybe we should ban bikes - sounds like we'd save a lot of pain and suffering and visits to the ER.

Totally agree. No one wants anyone to get hurt but we have to face reality. Bikes and cars are not a good mix. Does it really matter whose fault that is? This is a case of caving to the minority at the expense of the majority. Especially since cyclists cannot start and stop the way cars can. Riding on the right side of large vehicles expecting to go straight when those vehicles may turn right is silly and to fault drivers for not having swivel heads because you cannot manage what is directly in front of you (at your personal choice) is truly ridiculous.

So you are saying that if a car and a cyclist are riding next to each other then:
- The car is in front of the cyclist so of course he should see it; but
- It is inconceivable to expect the driver to look to his/ her right before turning because that would require that his head be on a "swivel"
- The cyclist is somehow to be "faulted" for choosing to bike but the driver does not have the same responsibility for choosing to drive a two ton machine that could kill someone

Seems just a wee bit contradictory.

I mean, a right hook is in fact a known danger, when road departments put bike lanes to the right of general-travel lanes. The primary responsibility for safe bike lanes belongs to the road departments. People operating vehicles have a responsibility too, though. When you're turning, you must yield the right of way to people who are going straight. Drivers should have their heads on a swivel, even with no bike lanes.

If you put them on the left wouldn’t you just have a left hook? I agree it’s on the driver to yield. When a driver right hooks a cyclist, the cyclist was in front of them just seconds before. Pay attention and don’t run people over.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm sorry, but those bike lanes are making Old Georgetown a complete cluster f***. Doubled the length of my commute this morning.

They need to do bike lanes that do not take away lanes for cars. It's not a zero-sum game, they need to add without taking away something

I drive "against" the rush hour flow each day and it is bumper to bumper the rush hour direction, even with work at home and hybrid work. So backed up. (I get on the beltway, and spouse goes up 270, so no we are not swapping out bikes)

Today there was an ambulance with its lights and sirens blaring en route to Suburban Hospital...stuck behind so many cars with nowhere to pull over.

Guess what, with 2 packed lanes southbound, and two pack lanes northbound, there was no where to move out of the way. Without a doubt there will be delays getting to the hospital. Are the cars supposed to ride over the posts into the bike lane? Or the ambulance? This is not a scenic bike route, but a commuter artery and emergency vehicle artery (e.g., fire stations and the B-CC rescue squad) hours each day.
I wonder how long until one needs to study the life and death impact of those two clogged lanes, on emergencies.

I just drove down the entirety of OGR. There was not one bike on OGR using those lanes, not surprising due to heavy rain today. The traffic was not good and I think that these types of changes to transportation that impact so many people should be up to a vote on how people would like to utilize tax payer funded roads. Off of this road are 2 merges onto interstate highways, NIH and a major thoroughfare to downtown Bethesda with delivery and semi trucks and as a previous poster stated, a hospital. With 2 lanes now gone, 33% of OGR is unusable for cars. We now have 33% of a major road underutilized. I'm sorry but let's look at the people who need to use these roads who arent in the "special" bike category. Older people and people with mobility issues, families, people commuting to work who have no access to a locker room or a shower, people running errands with multiple bags, people who don't have bikes, and every other person out there who needs to use a car for whatever reason for which a bike will not suffice.

It is a tragedy to lose people to bike accidents or to any kind of accidents. It does not mean that society has to overhaul everything to prevent it from ever happening again. In 2021 there were 597,000 bicycle related brain injuries from people falling off of bikes, not exclusive to car accidents. Maybe we should ban bikes - sounds like we'd save a lot of pain and suffering and visits to the ER.

Totally agree. No one wants anyone to get hurt but we have to face reality. Bikes and cars are not a good mix. Does it really matter whose fault that is? This is a case of caving to the minority at the expense of the majority. Especially since cyclists cannot start and stop the way cars can. Riding on the right side of large vehicles expecting to go straight when those vehicles may turn right is silly and to fault drivers for not having swivel heads because you cannot manage what is directly in front of you (at your personal choice) is truly ridiculous.

So you are saying that if a car and a cyclist are riding next to each other then:
- The car is in front of the cyclist so of course he should see it; but
- It is inconceivable to expect the driver to look to his/ her right before turning because that would require that his head be on a "swivel"
- The cyclist is somehow to be "faulted" for choosing to bike but the driver does not have the same responsibility for choosing to drive a two ton machine that could kill someone

Seems just a wee bit contradictory.

I mean, a right hook is in fact a known danger, when road departments put bike lanes to the right of general-travel lanes. The primary responsibility for safe bike lanes belongs to the road departments. People operating vehicles have a responsibility too, though. When you're turning, you must yield the right of way to people who are going straight. Drivers should have their heads on a swivel, even with no bike lanes.

If you put them on the left wouldn’t you just have a left hook? I agree it’s on the driver to yield. When a driver right hooks a cyclist, the cyclist was in front of them just seconds before. Pay attention and don’t run people over.

Agrees, but also there are things SHA could do, ranging from green paint for the bike lane through the intersection, as a visual cue to drivers (like at Georgia at Spring), to bike boxes so that bicyclists can get ahead of drivers who are fixing to turn right (like at Woodglen at Nicholson), to protected intersections (like at 2nd at Spring). Plus drivers need to learn to actually see bicyclists and remember their presence. Plus vehicles have way too many blind spots, especially the big ones.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm sorry, but those bike lanes are making Old Georgetown a complete cluster f***. Doubled the length of my commute this morning.

They need to do bike lanes that do not take away lanes for cars. It's not a zero-sum game, they need to add without taking away something

I drive "against" the rush hour flow each day and it is bumper to bumper the rush hour direction, even with work at home and hybrid work. So backed up. (I get on the beltway, and spouse goes up 270, so no we are not swapping out bikes)

Today there was an ambulance with its lights and sirens blaring en route to Suburban Hospital...stuck behind so many cars with nowhere to pull over.

Guess what, with 2 packed lanes southbound, and two pack lanes northbound, there was no where to move out of the way. Without a doubt there will be delays getting to the hospital. Are the cars supposed to ride over the posts into the bike lane? Or the ambulance? This is not a scenic bike route, but a commuter artery and emergency vehicle artery (e.g., fire stations and the B-CC rescue squad) hours each day.
I wonder how long until one needs to study the life and death impact of those two clogged lanes, on emergencies.

I just drove down the entirety of OGR. There was not one bike on OGR using those lanes, not surprising due to heavy rain today. The traffic was not good and I think that these types of changes to transportation that impact so many people should be up to a vote on how people would like to utilize tax payer funded roads. Off of this road are 2 merges onto interstate highways, NIH and a major thoroughfare to downtown Bethesda with delivery and semi trucks and as a previous poster stated, a hospital. With 2 lanes now gone, 33% of OGR is unusable for cars. We now have 33% of a major road underutilized. I'm sorry but let's look at the people who need to use these roads who arent in the "special" bike category. Older people and people with mobility issues, families, people commuting to work who have no access to a locker room or a shower, people running errands with multiple bags, people who don't have bikes, and every other person out there who needs to use a car for whatever reason for which a bike will not suffice.

It is a tragedy to lose people to bike accidents or to any kind of accidents. It does not mean that society has to overhaul everything to prevent it from ever happening again. In 2021 there were 597,000 bicycle related brain injuries from people falling off of bikes, not exclusive to car accidents. Maybe we should ban bikes - sounds like we'd save a lot of pain and suffering and visits to the ER.

Totally agree. No one wants anyone to get hurt but we have to face reality. Bikes and cars are not a good mix. Does it really matter whose fault that is? This is a case of caving to the minority at the expense of the majority. Especially since cyclists cannot start and stop the way cars can. Riding on the right side of large vehicles expecting to go straight when those vehicles may turn right is silly and to fault drivers for not having swivel heads because you cannot manage what is directly in front of you (at your personal choice) is truly ridiculous.

So you are saying that if a car and a cyclist are riding next to each other then:
- The car is in front of the cyclist so of course he should see it; but
- It is inconceivable to expect the driver to look to his/ her right before turning because that would require that his head be on a "swivel"
- The cyclist is somehow to be "faulted" for choosing to bike but the driver does not have the same responsibility for choosing to drive a two ton machine that could kill someone

Seems just a wee bit contradictory.

I mean, a right hook is in fact a known danger, when road departments put bike lanes to the right of general-travel lanes. The primary responsibility for safe bike lanes belongs to the road departments. People operating vehicles have a responsibility too, though. When you're turning, you must yield the right of way to people who are going straight. Drivers should have their heads on a swivel, even with no bike lanes.

If you put them on the left wouldn’t you just have a left hook? I agree it’s on the driver to yield. When a driver right hooks a cyclist, the cyclist was in front of them just seconds before. Pay attention and don’t run people over.

Agrees, but also there are things SHA could do, ranging from green paint for the bike lane through the intersection, as a visual cue to drivers (like at Georgia at Spring), to bike boxes so that bicyclists can get ahead of drivers who are fixing to turn right (like at Woodglen at Nicholson), to protected intersections (like at 2nd at Spring). Plus drivers need to learn to actually see bicyclists and remember their presence. Plus vehicles have way too many blind spots, especially the big ones.

I know there are standards that recommend green paint but I don’t want drivers looking down at the road surface because it limits their field of vision. All in favor of bike boxes for the OGR bike lanes but because the bike lanes are there I don’t see a need for them across the whole road. Just move the stop line back further so the bike box is in front of the stop line.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

I know there are standards that recommend green paint but I don’t want drivers looking down at the road surface because it limits their field of vision. All in favor of bike boxes for the OGR bike lanes but because the bike lanes are there I don’t see a need for them across the whole road. Just move the stop line back further so the bike box is in front of the stop line.

If only drivers would reliably stop behind the stop line

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I know there are standards that recommend green paint but I don’t want drivers looking down at the road surface because it limits their field of vision. All in favor of bike boxes for the OGR bike lanes but because the bike lanes are there I don’t see a need for them across the whole road. Just move the stop line back further so the bike box is in front of the stop line.

If only drivers would reliably stop behind the stop line

They stop behind the line more reliably than cyclists, if they stop at all.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I know there are standards that recommend green paint but I don’t want drivers looking down at the road surface because it limits their field of vision. All in favor of bike boxes for the OGR bike lanes but because the bike lanes are there I don’t see a need for them across the whole road. Just move the stop line back further so the bike box is in front of the stop line.

If only drivers would reliably stop behind the stop line

They stop behind the line more reliably than cyclists, if they stop at all.

so boring