Bike lanes violate disability access laws, new lawsuit says

[Anonymous]

I'm baffled how all these bike lanes were even built in such blatant violation of ADA law. Did the city think disabled people might not notice?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm baffled how all these bike lanes were even built in such blatant violation of ADA law. Did the city think disabled people might not notice?

You're baffled because the plans actually currently meet ADA requirements.

See 2-6 here: https://ddot.dc.gov/sites/default/files/dc/sites/ddot/DDOT%20Bicycle%20Facility%20Design%20Guide%20-%20Version%202%20%28Final%29.pdf

[Anonymous]

As the complaint says, though, "This is not a choice between accessibility and bicycle lanes."

And it's specifically complaining about the design of the 17th Street bike lane, not just flatly declaring (as many people are here) that all bike lanes are bad.

Glad to see there are a lot of allies for disability rights in D.C. now, I assume you'll all be out there fervently supporting this cause in situations when their goals don't directly line up with your preferred policy outcomes, too?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:As the complaint says, though, "This is not a choice between accessibility and bicycle lanes."

And it's specifically complaining about the design of the 17th Street bike lane, not just flatly declaring (as many people are here) that all bike lanes are bad.

Glad to see there are a lot of allies for disability rights in D.C. now, I assume you'll all be out there fervently supporting this cause in situations when their goals don't directly line up with your preferred policy outcomes, too?

Some of us aren't contemptuous of the disabled.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:As the complaint says, though, "This is not a choice between accessibility and bicycle lanes."

And it's specifically complaining about the design of the 17th Street bike lane, not just flatly declaring (as many people are here) that all bike lanes are bad.

Glad to see there are a lot of allies for disability rights in D.C. now, I assume you'll all be out there fervently supporting this cause in situations when their goals don't directly line up with your preferred policy outcomes, too?

exactly. I seriously doubt the “neighbors” would EVER agree to give up their precious RPP to create reserved disabled drop-off spaces with ramps.

[Anonymous]

I thought bike lanes were supposed to be used by wheelchairs and would increase racial diversity in upper NW? At least that's what the proponents hqve claimed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Basically D.C.'s bike lanes violate federal law. Great planning, guys.

Not all of them, just this one, specifically is alleged to violate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Seems like something DC should have thought about beforehand

https://twitter.com/maustermuhle/status/1594741861222162432

The bike people do not care about the disabled, except for the extent they can use them. One biker organized a group of blind people who lived nowhere near Seminary Road to insist that there lives were at peril unless bike lanes were added to slow traffic on the street. Traffic still moves at the same pace and no blind people use the road and no bikers use the bike lanes. I honk my horn and give a big thumbs up if I even seen the errant person running in the lane.

The bike lobby has inordinate power in DC, Alexandria, and Arlington. They are creating more problems then they are solving. I stopped using various routes to work because of bikers hauling their kids in unsafe ways. I am scared that a bike will topple over and I will be responsible for the death or injury of young children. I don't care if the adults endanger themselves, but my heart aches for those kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I thought bike lanes were supposed to be used by wheelchairs and would increase racial diversity in upper NW? At least that's what the proponents hqve claimed.

So only black people use wheelchairs? Seriously?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I thought bike lanes were supposed to be used by wheelchairs and would increase racial diversity in upper NW? At least that's what the proponents hqve claimed.

So only black people use wheelchairs? Seriously?

Absurd isn't it. But that's what the bike lane proponents have claimed. They've said that bike lanes will increase racial diversity and that wheelchairs will regularly use them. I don't think they've yet gone as far as you have and connected the two but who knows, they've made a lot of absurd claims.

[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.

Is this a joke? They would get mowed down by some a**hole on an ebike going 30mph.

[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.

Is this a joke? They would get mowed down by some a**hole on an ebike going 30mph.

From what I see on 15th street, the bicyclists stop for pedestrians far more than drivers. There are crosswalks without a stop sign so you can get a good comparison.

[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.

Is this a joke? They would get mowed down by some a**hole on an ebike going 30mph.

Not disabled but I've almost been mowed down an a**hole on an ebike. Can't imagine what it would be like for someone who is blind.

[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.

Is this a joke? They would get mowed down by some a**hole on an ebike going 30mph.

From what I see on 15th street, the bicyclists stop for pedestrians far more than drivers. There are crosswalks without a stop sign so you can get a good comparison.

From what I know of being a pedestrian downtown, bicyclists never stop for anyone.

[Anonymous]

I thought y’all said that no one uses the bike lanes? But now anyone who tries to set up a wheelchair in one is bound to get plowed down by a horde of e-bikers? What happened? How did things change so fast?