New bike lane on Old Georgetown Rd in Bethesda

[Anonymous]

For the person asking….those lanes help kids get to their friends houses (the neighborhood streets are mostly dead ends), the parks at ayrlawn and maplewood, the ymca, Boy Scout meetings at st Jane, school (st Jane, NBMS, and the French school). Once extended, they will help kids get to the library, WJHS, old georgetown square, wildwood shopping center and other destinations. The community that lives there very much supports it.
And commuters should also support them because it greatly decrease the chance that you will live with the horror that woman who hit the teen several years ago lives with. She was not at all at fault—it was totally the fault of the sidewalks being unsafe for bikes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
Bicycles should stay on the sidewalk. Sidewalks should be larger and have a painted bike portion so they don't run into pedestrians. The road is incredibly unsafe for cyclists, and a cycling path doesn't change that. I drive on Old G daily, and while I, as a car user, have no issues at all with the new cyclist portion, I don't think it makes cyclists safer.

That kind of thing exists but it would still require taking up a car traffic lane.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
Bicycles should stay on the sidewalk. Sidewalks should be larger and have a painted bike portion so they don't run into pedestrians. The road is incredibly unsafe for cyclists, and a cycling path doesn't change that. I drive on Old G daily, and while I, as a car user, have no issues at all with the new cyclist portion, I don't think it makes cyclists safer.

When you walk, do you like sharing the sidewalk with bicyclists?

I agree that the sidewalks on Old Georgetown Road are much too narrow. They should be wider. Of course, the only way to widen them is by "taking away" a lane from cars, so...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:For the person asking….those lanes help kids get to their friends houses (the neighborhood streets are mostly dead ends), the parks at ayrlawn and maplewood, the ymca, Boy Scout meetings at st Jane, school (st Jane, NBMS, and the French school). Once extended, they will help kids get to the library, WJHS, old georgetown square, wildwood shopping center and other destinations. The community that lives there very much supports it.
And commuters should also support them because it greatly decrease the chance that you will live with the horror that woman who hit the teen several years ago lives with. She was not at all at fault—it was totally the fault of the sidewalks being unsafe for bikes.

The sidewalks are so narrow and the traffic so fast that I even would feel uncomfortable having my tween walk on them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:For the person asking….those lanes help kids get to their friends houses (the neighborhood streets are mostly dead ends), the parks at ayrlawn and maplewood, the ymca, Boy Scout meetings at st Jane, school (st Jane, NBMS, and the French school). Once extended, they will help kids get to the library, WJHS, old georgetown square, wildwood shopping center and other destinations. The community that lives there very much supports it.
And commuters should also support them because it greatly decrease the chance that you will live with the horror that woman who hit the teen several years ago lives with. She was not at all at fault—it was totally the fault of the sidewalks being unsafe for bikes.

It would really help if they went all the way into downtown Bethesda.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Bicycles should stay on the sidewalk. Sidewalks should be larger and have a painted bike portion so they don't run into pedestrians. The road is incredibly unsafe for cyclists, and a cycling path doesn't change that. I drive on Old G daily, and while I, as a car user, have no issues at all with the new cyclist portion, I don't think it makes cyclists safer.

When you walk, do you like sharing the sidewalk with bicyclists?

I agree that the sidewalks on Old Georgetown Road are much too narrow. They should be wider. Of course, the only way to widen them is by "taking away" a lane from cars, so...

PP you replied to. I don't think the current width of sidewalk supports pedestrians and cyclists sharing it. I am perfectly fine with using a car lane to build out the sidewalk so everyone is safer. I come from Paris, and there the sidewalks are too crowded and uneven, with tons of hardscape obstacles, for cyclists to use, so motorbikes, scooters and cyclists all share the road with cars. It gets hairy, even though drivers are a lot more situationally aware of non-car vehicles than in the US. Here part of the problem is that car drivers don't think of checking for last-minute bikes in their blind spots.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Bicycles should stay on the sidewalk. Sidewalks should be larger and have a painted bike portion so they don't run into pedestrians. The road is incredibly unsafe for cyclists, and a cycling path doesn't change that. I drive on Old G daily, and while I, as a car user, have no issues at all with the new cyclist portion, I don't think it makes cyclists safer.

When you walk, do you like sharing the sidewalk with bicyclists?

I agree that the sidewalks on Old Georgetown Road are much too narrow. They should be wider. Of course, the only way to widen them is by "taking away" a lane from cars, so...

PP you replied to. I don't think the current width of sidewalk supports pedestrians and cyclists sharing it. I am perfectly fine with using a car lane to build out the sidewalk so everyone is safer. I come from Paris, and there the sidewalks are too crowded and uneven, with tons of hardscape obstacles, for cyclists to use, so motorbikes, scooters and cyclists all share the road with cars. It gets hairy, even though drivers are a lot more situationally aware of non-car vehicles than in the US. Here part of the problem is that car drivers don't think of checking for last-minute bikes in their blind spots.

Have you been to central Paris lately?

The bike lanes on Old Georgetown Road are far from ideal, but I do think they will make the road safer for everyone. Pedestrians, bicyclists, and drivers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Car are packed on two lanes in Bethesda, but the shiny new bike lane is empty 99.9% time.

How to make more people to ride a bike?

By providing bike lanes that are safe, comfortable and convenient.

Perhaps you are unaware that those bike lanes were paid for with the lives of two teenage boys. A few seconds of your time in a car is not worth more than their lives. I'm sure you agree.

I am aware of the tragic death of the two teens. I rode on the narrow side walk on OG and was annoyed by the trashcans, the up and down at the intersection.
There are many ways to improve the road for bikers but remove a full lane is not the best option.

You're absolutely right. For example, I would like to see the State Highway Administration add physical barriers between the bike lanes and the general lanes, as well as signals at all of the on and off ramps. There also need to be signals at Kingswood and Lone Oak. And the sidewalk on the east side at Kingswood should continue straight, instead of going off onto the service road and then back on in that weird jog. And there should be a walk signal on the south side of the intersection with Cheshire. And that fast right turn lane onto Maplewood is dangerous. And ... well, there's lots to do to make that whole stretch safer for everybody.

But, but, but if you address those issues a driver might be delayed by two seconds. Isn't it worth a pedestrian having to take additional time and effort to make an unsafe crossing if drivers are inconvenienced?

[Anonymous]

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

Bike lanes don't make your commute a cluster, other cars and drivers do.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Seriously, can one of our resident bike-disciples please explain this? Because it looks really, really passive aggressive.

Why would a bunch of cyclists lobby for a bike lane to be created, and then ride in the road next to it, refusing to use the bike lane they demanded be created.

Seriously - WHY???

Did you stop and ask them whether they "lobbied" for the bike lanes, or did you just assume that everyone on a bicycle belongs to the All-Powerful Bicycle Lobby?

If you're asking why they weren't riding in the bike lanes, I'm guessing the answer involves some or all of the following:

1. They don't feel comfortable in the bike lanes
2. They don't feel safe in the bike lanes
3. The bike lanes aren't configured for group rides
4. It's legal to ride in the general lanes

You’ve gotta be sh!tting me.

They don’t feel “comfortable” riding a bike in the bike lanes?

They don’t feel SAFE riding a bike in the bike lanes, so prefer to ride in traffic, surrounded by cars? Because THAT’s somehow safer than the g*******ed BIKE LANE which cyclists demanded be built?


Are you f***ing kidding me????? Really??????



This is why people are fed all the F ‘ the way up with cyclists. There’s just no g*******ed pleasing you people.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Seriously, can one of our resident bike-disciples please explain this? Because it looks really, really passive aggressive.

Why would a bunch of cyclists lobby for a bike lane to be created, and then ride in the road next to it, refusing to use the bike lane they demanded be created.

Seriously - WHY???

Did you stop and ask them whether they "lobbied" for the bike lanes, or did you just assume that everyone on a bicycle belongs to the All-Powerful Bicycle Lobby?

If you're asking why they weren't riding in the bike lanes, I'm guessing the answer involves some or all of the following:

1. They don't feel comfortable in the bike lanes
2. They don't feel safe in the bike lanes
3. The bike lanes aren't configured for group rides
4. It's legal to ride in the general lanes

You’ve gotta be sh!tting me.

They don’t feel “comfortable” riding a bike in the bike lanes?

They don’t feel SAFE riding a bike in the bike lanes, so prefer to ride in traffic, surrounded by cars? Because THAT’s somehow safer than the g*******ed BIKE LANE which cyclists demanded be built?


Are you f***ing kidding me????? Really??????



This is why people are fed all the F ‘ the way up with cyclists. There’s just no g*******ed pleasing you people.

Thank you for giving me a good laugh this morning. I needed it after I had to swerve onto the main road multiple times during my commute today bc cars were double parked in the bike lanes I use, which led to drivers honking at me and giving me the finger as they sped by me (and stop signs)

[Anonymous]

Why are they not doing more to encourage cyclists to utilize the very nice and adjacent trolley trail? What is the point of the trolley trail in the first place if not for use by bicycles instead of promoting cyclists to ride on a state highway.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Bicycles should stay on the sidewalk. Sidewalks should be larger and have a painted bike portion so they don't run into pedestrians. The road is incredibly unsafe for cyclists, and a cycling path doesn't change that. I drive on Old G daily, and while I, as a car user, have no issues at all with the new cyclist portion, I don't think it makes cyclists safer.

When you walk, do you like sharing the sidewalk with bicyclists?

I agree that the sidewalks on Old Georgetown Road are much too narrow. They should be wider. Of course, the only way to widen them is by "taking away" a lane from cars, so...

PP you replied to. I don't think the current width of sidewalk supports pedestrians and cyclists sharing it. I am perfectly fine with using a car lane to build out the sidewalk so everyone is safer. I come from Paris, and there the sidewalks are too crowded and uneven, with tons of hardscape obstacles, for cyclists to use, so motorbikes, scooters and cyclists all share the road with cars. It gets hairy, even though drivers are a lot more situationally aware of non-car vehicles than in the US. Here part of the problem is that car drivers don't think of checking for last-minute bikes in their blind spots.

Have you been to central Paris lately?

The bike lanes on Old Georgetown Road are far from ideal, but I do think they will make the road safer for everyone. Pedestrians, bicyclists, and drivers.

PP you replied to. Yes, I live there (as well as here). There is no good solution for Paris, given the myriad small streets and intersections. Here, in order of safest to least safe: widened sidewalk bike lane, road bike lane, no bike lane. I still don't want my kids cycling on the new Old G bike lane!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

You’ve gotta be sh!tting me.

They don’t feel “comfortable” riding a bike in the bike lanes?

They don’t feel SAFE riding a bike in the bike lanes, so prefer to ride in traffic, surrounded by cars? Because THAT’s somehow safer than the g*******ed BIKE LANE which cyclists demanded be built?

Are you f***ing kidding me????? Really??????

This is why people are fed all the F ‘ the way up with cyclists. There’s just no g*******ed pleasing you people.

I honestly don't understand why you find this confusing? Even people on NextDoor are posting about how they drove by the bike lanes and didn't think the bike lanes looked safe. As a card-carrying member of the Bike Lobby, I will often ride in the general lane instead of the bike lane, because yes, it's safer. There are unfortunately a lot of bad bike lanes in Montgomery County, completely aside from the issue mentioned by the PP, of bike lanes blocked by signs, parked cars, random pieces of cars, etc. You're also wrong about the history of the Old Georgetown Road bike lanes. They were demanded by community members and elected officials.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Bicycles should stay on the sidewalk. Sidewalks should be larger and have a painted bike portion so they don't run into pedestrians. The road is incredibly unsafe for cyclists, and a cycling path doesn't change that. I drive on Old G daily, and while I, as a car user, have no issues at all with the new cyclist portion, I don't think it makes cyclists safer.

When you walk, do you like sharing the sidewalk with bicyclists?

I agree that the sidewalks on Old Georgetown Road are much too narrow. They should be wider. Of course, the only way to widen them is by "taking away" a lane from cars, so...

PP you replied to. I don't think the current width of sidewalk supports pedestrians and cyclists sharing it. I am perfectly fine with using a car lane to build out the sidewalk so everyone is safer. I come from Paris, and there the sidewalks are too crowded and uneven, with tons of hardscape obstacles, for cyclists to use, so motorbikes, scooters and cyclists all share the road with cars. It gets hairy, even though drivers are a lot more situationally aware of non-car vehicles than in the US. Here part of the problem is that car drivers don't think of checking for last-minute bikes in their blind spots.

Have you been to central Paris lately?

The bike lanes on Old Georgetown Road are far from ideal, but I do think they will make the road safer for everyone. Pedestrians, bicyclists, and drivers.

PP you replied to. Yes, I live there (as well as here). There is no good solution for Paris, given the myriad small streets and intersections. Here, in order of safest to least safe: widened sidewalk bike lane, road bike lane, no bike lane. I still don't want my kids cycling on the new Old G bike lane!

I am not planning to ride in it either, and I am an adult. I will continue riding on the sidewalk, BUT the sidewalk will be safer for pedestrians as well as bicyclists, because of the bike lanes. So that's progress.