Bike lanes violate disability access laws, new lawsuit says

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We have to figure out how everyone can share the roads together. We all have rights to them no matter the modality.

Read the lawsuit. It says that there are ways to accommodate both public transit with full access to the curb plus bicycles. However, the district intentionally selected a plan that did not include ADA accommodations for both drivers and passengers. The current plants require disabled drivers and passengers to stop and unload and assemble/configure their wheelchair in an actively used bicycle lane then have to direct their wheelchair to the nearest corner for them to access the curb and sidewalk.

The way to accomplish what you suggest is for the district to follow the federal law and select a plan that allows ADA accessible access to the curb and sidewalk without having to disembark their vehicles or public transit in active traffic lanes and to travel in the street to a corner in order to access the sidewalk. There are several proposed options, but the district ignored all of them when selecting their design plans. The lawsuit is trying to force them to reconsider and use one of the ADA accessible options.

How is this different from the current state of affairs? Right now, they still have to exit into an active lane of traffic and assemble the wheelchair in a treebox, or walk to the corner to get to a curbcut. If anything this is an improvement because they could assemble the wheelchair in the bikelane, then take the bikelane to the curb cut. This is a cheap attack on bike lanes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:We have to figure out how everyone can share the roads together. We all have rights to them no matter the modality.

Nope, ADA protects disabled access. There is no comparable law for cyclists

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Per the lawsuit:

12 percent of DC residents have mobility disabilities
Three-quarters of them are African American
One third of them are over the age of 65

Bicyclists five times more likely to be white than Black
Bicyclists predominantly male, white, 25-40, higher income

And what percentage of them are *already* getting out of the car in the traffic lane? This is a ridiculous lawsuit.

Unless it's 100%, and it isn't because I don't with my disabled child, then it's not a ridiculous lawsuit.

+1

It's ridiculous the bike lanes were built without these accommodations.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We have to figure out how everyone can share the roads together. We all have rights to them no matter the modality.

Nope, ADA protects disabled access. There is no comparable law for cyclists

Well there's no comparable law for cars either, so maybe the supposed disability advocates should sue to just eliminate cars except for the disabled?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We have to figure out how everyone can share the roads together. We all have rights to them no matter the modality.

Read the lawsuit. It says that there are ways to accommodate both public transit with full access to the curb plus bicycles. However, the district intentionally selected a plan that did not include ADA accommodations for both drivers and passengers. The current plants require disabled drivers and passengers to stop and unload and assemble/configure their wheelchair in an actively used bicycle lane then have to direct their wheelchair to the nearest corner for them to access the curb and sidewalk.

The way to accomplish what you suggest is for the district to follow the federal law and select a plan that allows ADA accessible access to the curb and sidewalk without having to disembark their vehicles or public transit in active traffic lanes and to travel in the street to a corner in order to access the sidewalk. There are several proposed options, but the district ignored all of them when selecting their design plans. The lawsuit is trying to force them to reconsider and use one of the ADA accessible options.

How is this different from the current state of affairs? Right now, they still have to exit into an active lane of traffic and assemble the wheelchair in a treebox, or walk to the corner to get to a curbcut. If anything this is an improvement because they could assemble the wheelchair in the bikelane, then take the bikelane to the curb cut. This is a cheap attack on bike lanes.

You can't understand why I want my child on the safety of the grass ad not in traffic? Really? Do you let your child play in traffic, or is it just those of us whose children use wheelchairs that you think should do so?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Don't you already have to exit into the traffic lane no matter what if you're driving? I guess this could impact passengers.

This is a huge impact on passengers. Many people can exit from their vehicle to a curb, but they can't get from street level to a cub, so this requires them to wheel or walk with an assisted device a long a travel lane to get to a curb cut.

And what do they do when a tree box is there? So do we have to rip out all the street trees too?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Don't you already have to exit into the traffic lane no matter what if you're driving? I guess this could impact passengers.

This is a huge impact on passengers. Many people can exit from their vehicle to a curb, but they can't get from street level to a cub, so this requires them to wheel or walk with an assisted device a long a travel lane to get to a curb cut.

And what do they do when a tree box is there? So do we have to rip out all the street trees too?

They pull forward a few feet.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We have to figure out how everyone can share the roads together. We all have rights to them no matter the modality.

Read the lawsuit. It says that there are ways to accommodate both public transit with full access to the curb plus bicycles. However, the district intentionally selected a plan that did not include ADA accommodations for both drivers and passengers. The current plants require disabled drivers and passengers to stop and unload and assemble/configure their wheelchair in an actively used bicycle lane then have to direct their wheelchair to the nearest corner for them to access the curb and sidewalk.

The way to accomplish what you suggest is for the district to follow the federal law and select a plan that allows ADA accessible access to the curb and sidewalk without having to disembark their vehicles or public transit in active traffic lanes and to travel in the street to a corner in order to access the sidewalk. There are several proposed options, but the district ignored all of them when selecting their design plans. The lawsuit is trying to force them to reconsider and use one of the ADA accessible options.

How is this different from the current state of affairs? Right now, they still have to exit into an active lane of traffic and assemble the wheelchair in a treebox, or walk to the corner to get to a curbcut. If anything this is an improvement because they could assemble the wheelchair in the bikelane, then take the bikelane to the curb cut. This is a cheap attack on bike lanes.

You can't understand why I want my child on the safety of the grass ad not in traffic? Really? Do you let your child play in traffic, or is it just those of us whose children use wheelchairs that you think should do so?

I don't think you take your child out into the treebox, no. I think you step a few feet down and take them out directly onto the side walk. Same way you will into the bike lane. The bike lane may even be better because it will be easier to navigate obstructions on the side walk - your door doesn't open immediately into the tree box.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Don't you already have to exit into the traffic lane no matter what if you're driving? I guess this could impact passengers.

This is a huge impact on passengers. Many people can exit from their vehicle to a curb, but they can't get from street level to a cub, so this requires them to wheel or walk with an assisted device a long a travel lane to get to a curb cut.

And what do they do when a tree box is there? So do we have to rip out all the street trees too?

They pull forward a few feet.

Lol.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We have to figure out how everyone can share the roads together. We all have rights to them no matter the modality.

Read the lawsuit. It says that there are ways to accommodate both public transit with full access to the curb plus bicycles. However, the district intentionally selected a plan that did not include ADA accommodations for both drivers and passengers. The current plants require disabled drivers and passengers to stop and unload and assemble/configure their wheelchair in an actively used bicycle lane then have to direct their wheelchair to the nearest corner for them to access the curb and sidewalk.

The way to accomplish what you suggest is for the district to follow the federal law and select a plan that allows ADA accessible access to the curb and sidewalk without having to disembark their vehicles or public transit in active traffic lanes and to travel in the street to a corner in order to access the sidewalk. There are several proposed options, but the district ignored all of them when selecting their design plans. The lawsuit is trying to force them to reconsider and use one of the ADA accessible options.

How is this different from the current state of affairs? Right now, they still have to exit into an active lane of traffic and assemble the wheelchair in a treebox, or walk to the corner to get to a curbcut. If anything this is an improvement because they could assemble the wheelchair in the bikelane, then take the bikelane to the curb cut. This is a cheap attack on bike lanes.

And you know, there are traffic engineers who have come up with more than one solution that can provide both safe ADA-accessible access and bike lanes and bus lanes on the roads. ADA-accessible access and bike lines and public transit access are not mutually exclusive, despite what the district's proposals would suggest.

[Anonymous]

Great. I have an idea: Reserve two parking spaces with adjacent curb cuts at the top and bottom of each block for disability access. That means that the RPP parking will be reduced by 4 spaces on each block. Sound good everyone?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We have to figure out how everyone can share the roads together. We all have rights to them no matter the modality.

Read the lawsuit. It says that there are ways to accommodate both public transit with full access to the curb plus bicycles. However, the district intentionally selected a plan that did not include ADA accommodations for both drivers and passengers. The current plants require disabled drivers and passengers to stop and unload and assemble/configure their wheelchair in an actively used bicycle lane then have to direct their wheelchair to the nearest corner for them to access the curb and sidewalk.

The way to accomplish what you suggest is for the district to follow the federal law and select a plan that allows ADA accessible access to the curb and sidewalk without having to disembark their vehicles or public transit in active traffic lanes and to travel in the street to a corner in order to access the sidewalk. There are several proposed options, but the district ignored all of them when selecting their design plans. The lawsuit is trying to force them to reconsider and use one of the ADA accessible options.

How is this different from the current state of affairs? Right now, they still have to exit into an active lane of traffic and assemble the wheelchair in a treebox, or walk to the corner to get to a curbcut. If anything this is an improvement because they could assemble the wheelchair in the bikelane, then take the bikelane to the curb cut. This is a cheap attack on bike lanes.

You can't understand why I want my child on the safety of the grass ad not in traffic? Really? Do you let your child play in traffic, or is it just those of us whose children use wheelchairs that you think should do so?

I don't think you take your child out into the treebox, no. I think you step a few feet down and take them out directly onto the side walk. Same way you will into the bike lane. The bike lane may even be better because it will be easier to navigate obstructions on the side walk - your door doesn't open immediately into the tree box.

Disabled people don't want to get out into a bike lane where they'll get mowed down by some a**hole on an ebike going 30mph.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We have to figure out how everyone can share the roads together. We all have rights to them no matter the modality.

Read the lawsuit. It says that there are ways to accommodate both public transit with full access to the curb plus bicycles. However, the district intentionally selected a plan that did not include ADA accommodations for both drivers and passengers. The current plants require disabled drivers and passengers to stop and unload and assemble/configure their wheelchair in an actively used bicycle lane then have to direct their wheelchair to the nearest corner for them to access the curb and sidewalk.

The way to accomplish what you suggest is for the district to follow the federal law and select a plan that allows ADA accessible access to the curb and sidewalk without having to disembark their vehicles or public transit in active traffic lanes and to travel in the street to a corner in order to access the sidewalk. There are several proposed options, but the district ignored all of them when selecting their design plans. The lawsuit is trying to force them to reconsider and use one of the ADA accessible options.

How is this different from the current state of affairs? Right now, they still have to exit into an active lane of traffic and assemble the wheelchair in a treebox, or walk to the corner to get to a curbcut. If anything this is an improvement because they could assemble the wheelchair in the bikelane, then take the bikelane to the curb cut. This is a cheap attack on bike lanes.

You can't understand why I want my child on the safety of the grass ad not in traffic? Really? Do you let your child play in traffic, or is it just those of us whose children use wheelchairs that you think should do so?

I don't think you take your child out into the treebox, no. I think you step a few feet down and take them out directly onto the side walk. Same way you will into the bike lane. The bike lane may even be better because it will be easier to navigate obstructions on the side walk - your door doesn't open immediately into the tree box.

Disabled people don't want to get out into a bike lane where they'll get mowed down by some a**hole on an ebike going 30mph.

This. That poster is not being genuine. And if they are, they’re really stupid. There is a big difference between someone getting out of the car on a sidewalk and a dedicated bike lane.

[Anonymous]

When DC implemented its “everybody pays” parking scheme it actively reduced the number of spaces reserved for the disabled. So this attitude is nothing new.

And bicycle lanes are an absolute stupidity.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We have to figure out how everyone can share the roads together. We all have rights to them no matter the modality.

Great. How about we start with making sure the handful of loudest complainers at the table don't get to make everyone else suffer?

Bikers?