New bike lane on Old Georgetown Rd in Bethesda

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yikes, just got a glimpse of typical cyclist entitlement when searching for a recent news article about the lanes. This happened in DC about a year ago. Unbelievable attitude and totally inappropriate behavior. Vigilante cyclists are a real thing.

The "cyclists" who have been killed on this road or seriously injured on this road in recent years are a 17-year-old boy on the sidewalk, an 18-year-old boy on the sidewalk, a 13-year-old girl on the sidewalk, and a family with children on the sidewalk. Your post is bigotry and nothing else.

Wasn't talking about them. I have encountered many an aggressive cyclist on the roads around here. One even was extending a long pole out into my traffic lane to prevent me from passing him while he was on the left side of a VERY wide shoulder riding much slower than the moving traffic. No excuse for such obnoxious behavior.

This is not a thread about mean things people have done to you while you were using the roads. It's about the new bike lanes on Old Georgetown Road.

We have to remember, though, the very people who are ramrodding this project down citizen's throats.

Ah yes, the Maryland State Highway Administration.

And they were lobbied by these jerks. https://waba.org/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yikes, just got a glimpse of typical cyclist entitlement when searching for a recent news article about the lanes. This happened in DC about a year ago. Unbelievable attitude and totally inappropriate behavior. Vigilante cyclists are a real thing.

The "cyclists" who have been killed on this road or seriously injured on this road in recent years are a 17-year-old boy on the sidewalk, an 18-year-old boy on the sidewalk, a 13-year-old girl on the sidewalk, and a family with children on the sidewalk. Your post is bigotry and nothing else.

Wasn't talking about them. I have encountered many an aggressive cyclist on the roads around here. One even was extending a long pole out into my traffic lane to prevent me from passing him while he was on the left side of a VERY wide shoulder riding much slower than the moving traffic. No excuse for such obnoxious behavior.

This is not a thread about mean things people have done to you while you were using the roads. It's about the new bike lanes on Old Georgetown Road.

We have to remember, though, the very people who are ramrodding this project down citizen's throats.

Ah yes, the Maryland State Highway Administration.

And they were lobbied by these jerks. https://waba.org/

If the Maryland State Highway Administration did what WABA wanted them to do, you'd be complaining about many, many more state roads in Montgomery County. You still have 4 lanes to drive on, you just don't have 6, because SHA decided that they didn't want a third dead teenage bicyclist in Bethesda.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yikes, just got a glimpse of typical cyclist entitlement when searching for a recent news article about the lanes. This happened in DC about a year ago. Unbelievable attitude and totally inappropriate behavior. Vigilante cyclists are a real thing.

The "cyclists" who have been killed on this road or seriously injured on this road in recent years are a 17-year-old boy on the sidewalk, an 18-year-old boy on the sidewalk, a 13-year-old girl on the sidewalk, and a family with children on the sidewalk. Your post is bigotry and nothing else.

Wasn't talking about them. I have encountered many an aggressive cyclist on the roads around here. One even was extending a long pole out into my traffic lane to prevent me from passing him while he was on the left side of a VERY wide shoulder riding much slower than the moving traffic. No excuse for such obnoxious behavior.

This is not a thread about mean things people have done to you while you were using the roads. It's about the new bike lanes on Old Georgetown Road.

We have to remember, though, the very people who are ramrodding this project down citizen's throats.

Ah yes, the Maryland State Highway Administration.

And they were lobbied by these jerks. https://waba.org/

If the Maryland State Highway Administration did what WABA wanted them to do, you'd be complaining about many, many more state roads in Montgomery County. You still have 4 lanes to drive on, you just don't have 6, because SHA decided that they didn't want a third dead teenage bicyclist in Bethesda.

Old Georgetown Road is a pilot for other state roads. WABA won Old Georgetown Road. It won’t win the others, though it did succeed in making 355 just a little more broken.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yikes, just got a glimpse of typical cyclist entitlement when searching for a recent news article about the lanes. This happened in DC about a year ago. Unbelievable attitude and totally inappropriate behavior. Vigilante cyclists are a real thing.

The "cyclists" who have been killed on this road or seriously injured on this road in recent years are a 17-year-old boy on the sidewalk, an 18-year-old boy on the sidewalk, a 13-year-old girl on the sidewalk, and a family with children on the sidewalk. Your post is bigotry and nothing else.

Wasn't talking about them. I have encountered many an aggressive cyclist on the roads around here. One even was extending a long pole out into my traffic lane to prevent me from passing him while he was on the left side of a VERY wide shoulder riding much slower than the moving traffic. No excuse for such obnoxious behavior.

This is not a thread about mean things people have done to you while you were using the roads. It's about the new bike lanes on Old Georgetown Road.

We have to remember, though, the very people who are ramrodding this project down citizen's throats.

Ah yes, the Maryland State Highway Administration.

And they were lobbied by these jerks. https://waba.org/

If the Maryland State Highway Administration did what WABA wanted them to do, you'd be complaining about many, many more state roads in Montgomery County. You still have 4 lanes to drive on, you just don't have 6, because SHA decided that they didn't want a third dead teenage bicyclist in Bethesda.

Old Georgetown Road is a pilot for other state roads. WABA won Old Georgetown Road. It won’t win the others, though it did succeed in making 355 just a little more broken.

Yes, and I'm looking forward to it. Safer roads, fewer road deaths. I support that.

[Anonymous]

As the parent of teens who also lives in a community off of OG, there is not a chance in hell I’d let them ride on OG before the bike lanes or now. They are a nightmare for everyone. I am not opposed to better options for cyclists and pedestrians but this configuration is not it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:As the parent of teens who also lives in a community off of OG, there is not a chance in hell I’d let them ride on OG before the bike lanes or now. They are a nightmare for everyone. I am not opposed to better options for cyclists and pedestrians but this configuration is not it.

What, exactly, do you mean by "nightmare for everyone"? What configuration would you support?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yikes, just got a glimpse of typical cyclist entitlement when searching for a recent news article about the lanes. This happened in DC about a year ago. Unbelievable attitude and totally inappropriate behavior. Vigilante cyclists are a real thing.

The "cyclists" who have been killed on this road or seriously injured on this road in recent years are a 17-year-old boy on the sidewalk, an 18-year-old boy on the sidewalk, a 13-year-old girl on the sidewalk, and a family with children on the sidewalk. Your post is bigotry and nothing else.

Wasn't talking about them. I have encountered many an aggressive cyclist on the roads around here. One even was extending a long pole out into my traffic lane to prevent me from passing him while he was on the left side of a VERY wide shoulder riding much slower than the moving traffic. No excuse for such obnoxious behavior.

This is not a thread about mean things people have done to you while you were using the roads. It's about the new bike lanes on Old Georgetown Road.

We have to remember, though, the very people who are ramrodding this project down citizen's throats.

Ah yes, the Maryland State Highway Administration.

And they were lobbied by these jerks. https://waba.org/

If the Maryland State Highway Administration did what WABA wanted them to do, you'd be complaining about many, many more state roads in Montgomery County. You still have 4 lanes to drive on, you just don't have 6, because SHA decided that they didn't want a third dead teenage bicyclist in Bethesda.

Old Georgetown Road is a pilot for other state roads. WABA won Old Georgetown Road. It won’t win the others, though it did succeed in making 355 just a little more broken.

Yes, and I'm looking forward to it. Safer roads, fewer road deaths. I support that.

They won’t be doing this again for a long time because the actual length of delays is nowhere close to what was promised. Enjoy these lanes, if you even get to keep them, because there won’t be others like them for a long time.

[Anonymous]

Not pp, but have already sat in backups from Pike and Rose to Democracy, and more than once have sat through THREE light cycles at Tuckerman to get through that intersection.

While I agree we need bike lanes, a major thoroughfare that is already blocked with traffic, was not the place to remove one-third of the traffic lanes for cars.

They need to go, and go quickly

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Not pp, but have already sat in backups from Pike and Rose to Democracy, and more than once have sat through THREE light cycles at Tuckerman to get through that intersection.

While I agree we need bike lanes, a major thoroughfare that is already blocked with traffic, was not the place to remove one-third of the traffic lanes for cars.

They need to go, and go quickly

In other words, while you agree we need bike lanes, you think driving time is more important. So, where do you think we should have bike lanes?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not pp, but have already sat in backups from Pike and Rose to Democracy, and more than once have sat through THREE light cycles at Tuckerman to get through that intersection.

While I agree we need bike lanes, a major thoroughfare that is already blocked with traffic, was not the place to remove one-third of the traffic lanes for cars.

They need to go, and go quickly

In other words, while you agree we need bike lanes, you think driving time is more important. So, where do you think we should have bike lanes?

The only way bike lanes should be handled on that road is to actually ADD a lane...not take away a lane. That means major construction. I support that. I, along with the majority of county residents, do not support the current solution and suspect those lanes will be going in a couple of months.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not pp, but have already sat in backups from Pike and Rose to Democracy, and more than once have sat through THREE light cycles at Tuckerman to get through that intersection.

While I agree we need bike lanes, a major thoroughfare that is already blocked with traffic, was not the place to remove one-third of the traffic lanes for cars.

They need to go, and go quickly

In other words, while you agree we need bike lanes, you think driving time is more important. So, where do you think we should have bike lanes?

The only way bike lanes should be handled on that road is to actually ADD a lane...not take away a lane. That means major construction. I support that. I, along with the majority of county residents, do not support the current solution and suspect those lanes will be going in a couple of months.

There is no space to add a lane without taking private property. And even if there were space to add a lane, it would take years. And the road would be even wider, which would make it even more dangerous. What actual, feasible solution do you support, that people can use now?

[Anonymous]

Couldn't they have transformed the sidewalk into a Nike label I stead of taking up a lane?

Yea, I get the pedestrians would be mad, but the number of people walking on the sidewalk isn't a very low number compared to bikers. Something has to give..

Or make the existing sidewalk more mixed-use. Or perhaps "bikers only" during peak rush hour (so pedestrians walk at your own risk).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Couldn't they have transformed the sidewalk into a Nike label I stead of taking up a lane?

Yea, I get the pedestrians would be mad, but the number of people walking on the sidewalk isn't a very low number compared to bikers. Something has to give..

Or make the existing sidewalk more mixed-use. Or perhaps "bikers only" during peak rush hour (so pedestrians walk at your own risk).

"bike lane instead" ^^^ not "Nike label I stead"

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not pp, but have already sat in backups from Pike and Rose to Democracy, and more than once have sat through THREE light cycles at Tuckerman to get through that intersection.

While I agree we need bike lanes, a major thoroughfare that is already blocked with traffic, was not the place to remove one-third of the traffic lanes for cars.

They need to go, and go quickly

In other words, while you agree we need bike lanes, you think driving time is more important. So, where do you think we should have bike lanes?

The only way bike lanes should be handled on that road is to actually ADD a lane...not take away a lane. That means major construction. I support that. I, along with the majority of county residents, do not support the current solution and suspect those lanes will be going in a couple of months.

There is no space to add a lane without taking private property. And even if there were space to add a lane, it would take years. And the road would be even wider, which would make it even more dangerous. What actual, feasible solution do you support, that people can use now?

Well then bike traffic should be diverted to side roads or the existing bike path. I read somewhere that the SHA was completely unaware of the Capital Crescent Trail.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Couldn't they have transformed the sidewalk into a Nike label I stead of taking up a lane?

Yea, I get the pedestrians would be mad, but the number of people walking on the sidewalk isn't a very low number compared to bikers. Something has to give..

Or make the existing sidewalk more mixed-use. Or perhaps "bikers only" during peak rush hour (so pedestrians walk at your own risk).

Yes, they could transform the sidewalks into shared use paths, by widening them into the road. I support this, because I think it would be safer than plastic posts that you can drive over without damaging your car. However, the result for drivers would be the same: 4 lanes to drive in, instead of 6.

The sidewalk, pre-bike-lanes, actually was mixed-use and walk-at-your-own risk. How did that work out? Two dead teenagers in 3 years.