New bike lane on Old Georgetown Rd in Bethesda

[Anonymous]

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.

So it’s perfectly fine by you for cars to block bike lanes and force cyclists out into the street where they can be killed (a three year died in Chicago when her mother went around a vehicle parked in a bike lane) or, maybe worse by you, slow down traffic? I wouldn't have banged on the trunk but do you think a confrontation would not have ensued had the cyclist instead pulled up beside the driver and asked him to move? Should he have called 911 instead? It's more than a bit revealing that you call the cyclist "entitled" and not the driver, who is illegally parked, obstructing a bike lane, and has racked up $10k in speeding tickets in DC alone. A rather weird set of values you have.

Sorry, but that cyclist even admitted he is a jerk! Come on...that kind of behavior is off the rails. He could have called the non emergency number or nicely told them that they weren't allowed to park there. I would have been very upset if someone did that to me. I very well could have pulled over for an emergency or whatnot. The cyclist had no idea why the people were pulled over or that they had speeding fines.

You (or the PP, if different) described his actions as "typical cyclist entitlement", which is nothing but bigoted, dehumanizing nonsense that feeds a vicious stereotype that is perfectly capable of getting people killed:

I would not have banged on the car, but pulling up beside the car to talk to the driver would have meant that he was blocking a traffic lane and putting himself at risk in the process. Calling 311 would be a complete waste of time - I've done it many times and not once have they responded.

I'm sorry that you are so offended by his banging on a piece of metal, but I'm not particularly inclined to get worked up about others being rude to those who flagrantly violate laws designed to protect vulnerable road users. If someone yells an obscenity at a driver who runs a red light, is that "typical pedestrian behavior"?

Wait, are you saying we get to yell obscenities at cyclists who run red lights? I am very pro that. (DP)

Do you yell obscenities at drivers who run red lights, too?

[Anonymous]

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.

So it’s perfectly fine by you for cars to block bike lanes and force cyclists out into the street where they can be killed (a three year died in Chicago when her mother went around a vehicle parked in a bike lane) or, maybe worse by you, slow down traffic? I wouldn't have banged on the trunk but do you think a confrontation would not have ensued had the cyclist instead pulled up beside the driver and asked him to move? Should he have called 911 instead? It's more than a bit revealing that you call the cyclist "entitled" and not the driver, who is illegally parked, obstructing a bike lane, and has racked up $10k in speeding tickets in DC alone. A rather weird set of values you have.

Sorry, but that cyclist even admitted he is a jerk! Come on...that kind of behavior is off the rails. He could have called the non emergency number or nicely told them that they weren't allowed to park there. I would have been very upset if someone did that to me. I very well could have pulled over for an emergency or whatnot. The cyclist had no idea why the people were pulled over or that they had speeding fines.

You (or the PP, if different) described his actions as "typical cyclist entitlement", which is nothing but bigoted, dehumanizing nonsense that feeds a vicious stereotype that is perfectly capable of getting people killed:

I would not have banged on the car, but pulling up beside the car to talk to the driver would have meant that he was blocking a traffic lane and putting himself at risk in the process. Calling 311 would be a complete waste of time - I've done it many times and not once have they responded.

I'm sorry that you are so offended by his banging on a piece of metal, but I'm not particularly inclined to get worked up about others being rude to those who flagrantly violate laws designed to protect vulnerable road users. If someone yells an obscenity at a driver who runs a red light, is that "typical pedestrian behavior"?

Wait, are you saying we get to yell obscenities at cyclists who run red lights? I am very pro that. (DP)

Yelling at anyone - driver, cyclist, or even a pedestrian (such as someone who runs out from behind parked cars straight into the path of a cyclist) - who endangers a vulnerable road user is perfectly justified. A lot of people need to be made more aware that they live in a society and their state of self-absorption can gravely harm others.

[Anonymous]

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.

So it’s perfectly fine by you for cars to block bike lanes and force cyclists out into the street where they can be killed (a three year died in Chicago when her mother went around a vehicle parked in a bike lane) or, maybe worse by you, slow down traffic? I wouldn't have banged on the trunk but do you think a confrontation would not have ensued had the cyclist instead pulled up beside the driver and asked him to move? Should he have called 911 instead? It's more than a bit revealing that you call the cyclist "entitled" and not the driver, who is illegally parked, obstructing a bike lane, and has racked up $10k in speeding tickets in DC alone. A rather weird set of values you have.

Sorry, but that cyclist even admitted he is a jerk! Come on...that kind of behavior is off the rails. He could have called the non emergency number or nicely told them that they weren't allowed to park there. I would have been very upset if someone did that to me. I very well could have pulled over for an emergency or whatnot. The cyclist had no idea why the people were pulled over or that they had speeding fines.

You (or the PP, if different) described his actions as "typical cyclist entitlement", which is nothing but bigoted, dehumanizing nonsense that feeds a vicious stereotype that is perfectly capable of getting people killed:

I would not have banged on the car, but pulling up beside the car to talk to the driver would have meant that he was blocking a traffic lane and putting himself at risk in the process. Calling 311 would be a complete waste of time - I've done it many times and not once have they responded.

I'm sorry that you are so offended by his banging on a piece of metal, but I'm not particularly inclined to get worked up about others being rude to those who flagrantly violate laws designed to protect vulnerable road users. If someone yells an obscenity at a driver who runs a red light, is that "typical pedestrian behavior"?

Wow, so you are defending this bizarre behavior. I rest my case...I suspect you are one of those entitled bikers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Agree with this. We all have set-backs in Montgomery County (ours is 8 feet I think, but we are not on a major road). Use them and ADD a bike lane, or a buffer between sidewalk and road. Don't take away 1/3 of the road lanes on an already heavily trafficked roadway

No, there is not extra space for all roads. Some roads occupy the entire right-of-way. Much of Old Georgetown Road, for example. Nobody has taken away a lane; the lane is still there. It's just that now it's for bicycling and for buffering the sidewalk. And for driving, you still have 2 other lanes in each direction.

Yes, the problem is that OGR was widened to add a lane a couple of decades ago but there really wasn’t space to do it safely, hence the radically unsafe sidewalks (at least in the area south of democracy). I’ve seen a bunch of people using the bikes lanes this week and really haven’t noticed any additional time to my drive times.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Agree with this. We all have set-backs in Montgomery County (ours is 8 feet I think, but we are not on a major road). Use them and ADD a bike lane, or a buffer between sidewalk and road. Don't take away 1/3 of the road lanes on an already heavily trafficked roadway

No, there is not extra space for all roads. Some roads occupy the entire right-of-way. Much of Old Georgetown Road, for example. Nobody has taken away a lane; the lane is still there. It's just that now it's for bicycling and for buffering the sidewalk. And for driving, you still have 2 other lanes in each direction.

Not for very long though. Enjoy the lanes while there are there. I guarantee you they will be gone soon.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Sorry, but that cyclist even admitted he is a jerk! Come on...that kind of behavior is off the rails. He could have called the non emergency number or nicely told them that they weren't allowed to park there. I would have been very upset if someone did that to me. I very well could have pulled over for an emergency or whatnot. The cyclist had no idea why the people were pulled over or that they had speeding fines.

You still don't get to park in the bike lane, just like you don't get to park on the sidewalk.

I got doored once by a driver who didn't look. The driver yelled at me for damaging his car. Fortunately I wasn't injured, but dooring can kill people.

So where does a car pull over for an emergency then? I'm waiting.

[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.

So it’s perfectly fine by you for cars to block bike lanes and force cyclists out into the street where they can be killed (a three year died in Chicago when her mother went around a vehicle parked in a bike lane) or, maybe worse by you, slow down traffic? I wouldn't have banged on the trunk but do you think a confrontation would not have ensued had the cyclist instead pulled up beside the driver and asked him to move? Should he have called 911 instead? It's more than a bit revealing that you call the cyclist "entitled" and not the driver, who is illegally parked, obstructing a bike lane, and has racked up $10k in speeding tickets in DC alone. A rather weird set of values you have.

Sorry, but that cyclist even admitted he is a jerk! Come on...that kind of behavior is off the rails. He could have called the non emergency number or nicely told them that they weren't allowed to park there. I would have been very upset if someone did that to me. I very well could have pulled over for an emergency or whatnot. The cyclist had no idea why the people were pulled over or that they had speeding fines.

You (or the PP, if different) described his actions as "typical cyclist entitlement", which is nothing but bigoted, dehumanizing nonsense that feeds a vicious stereotype that is perfectly capable of getting people killed:

I would not have banged on the car, but pulling up beside the car to talk to the driver would have meant that he was blocking a traffic lane and putting himself at risk in the process. Calling 311 would be a complete waste of time - I've done it many times and not once have they responded.

I'm sorry that you are so offended by his banging on a piece of metal, but I'm not particularly inclined to get worked up about others being rude to those who flagrantly violate laws designed to protect vulnerable road users. If someone yells an obscenity at a driver who runs a red light, is that "typical pedestrian behavior"?

Wait, are you saying we get to yell obscenities at cyclists who run red lights? I am very pro that. (DP)

Yelling at anyone - driver, cyclist, or even a pedestrian (such as someone who runs out from behind parked cars straight into the path of a cyclist) - who endangers a vulnerable road user is perfectly justified. A lot of people need to be made more aware that they live in a society and their state of self-absorption can gravely harm others.

Yup I know the type...the worked up bike Karen lol.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Agree with this. We all have set-backs in Montgomery County (ours is 8 feet I think, but we are not on a major road). Use them and ADD a bike lane, or a buffer between sidewalk and road. Don't take away 1/3 of the road lanes on an already heavily trafficked roadway

No, there is not extra space for all roads. Some roads occupy the entire right-of-way. Much of Old Georgetown Road, for example. Nobody has taken away a lane; the lane is still there. It's just that now it's for bicycling and for buffering the sidewalk. And for driving, you still have 2 other lanes in each direction.

Not for very long though. Enjoy the lanes while there are there. I guarantee you they will be gone soon.

Yes, just like what happened on Seminary Road in Alexandria. So many people were so upset that they ripped the bike lane out mere weeks later. Jk, the road diet is still there, it didn't delay cars, it did reduce crashes, and it also reduced speeding.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Sorry, but that cyclist even admitted he is a jerk! Come on...that kind of behavior is off the rails. He could have called the non emergency number or nicely told them that they weren't allowed to park there. I would have been very upset if someone did that to me. I very well could have pulled over for an emergency or whatnot. The cyclist had no idea why the people were pulled over or that they had speeding fines.

You still don't get to park in the bike lane, just like you don't get to park on the sidewalk.

I got doored once by a driver who didn't look. The driver yelled at me for damaging his car. Fortunately I wasn't injured, but dooring can kill people.

So where does a car pull over for an emergency then? I'm waiting.

In the road.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Agree with this. We all have set-backs in Montgomery County (ours is 8 feet I think, but we are not on a major road). Use them and ADD a bike lane, or a buffer between sidewalk and road. Don't take away 1/3 of the road lanes on an already heavily trafficked roadway

No, there is not extra space for all roads. Some roads occupy the entire right-of-way. Much of Old Georgetown Road, for example. Nobody has taken away a lane; the lane is still there. It's just that now it's for bicycling and for buffering the sidewalk. And for driving, you still have 2 other lanes in each direction.

Not for very long though. Enjoy the lanes while there are there. I guarantee you they will be gone soon.

Yes, just like what happened on Seminary Road in Alexandria. So many people were so upset that they ripped the bike lane out mere weeks later. Jk, the road diet is still there, it didn't delay cars, it did reduce crashes, and it also reduced speeding.

You don't know what will happen in this case. Residents are taking action...it is wonderful to see this!!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Sorry, but that cyclist even admitted he is a jerk! Come on...that kind of behavior is off the rails. He could have called the non emergency number or nicely told them that they weren't allowed to park there. I would have been very upset if someone did that to me. I very well could have pulled over for an emergency or whatnot. The cyclist had no idea why the people were pulled over or that they had speeding fines.

You still don't get to park in the bike lane, just like you don't get to park on the sidewalk.

I got doored once by a driver who didn't look. The driver yelled at me for damaging his car. Fortunately I wasn't injured, but dooring can kill people.

So where does a car pull over for an emergency then? I'm waiting.

In the road.

So basically the driver of a care with an emergency should stop in the middle of the road so the bike lane will be clear. Got it.

[Anonymous]

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.

So it’s perfectly fine by you for cars to block bike lanes and force cyclists out into the street where they can be killed (a three year died in Chicago when her mother went around a vehicle parked in a bike lane) or, maybe worse by you, slow down traffic? I wouldn't have banged on the trunk but do you think a confrontation would not have ensued had the cyclist instead pulled up beside the driver and asked him to move? Should he have called 911 instead? It's more than a bit revealing that you call the cyclist "entitled" and not the driver, who is illegally parked, obstructing a bike lane, and has racked up $10k in speeding tickets in DC alone. A rather weird set of values you have.

Sorry, but that cyclist even admitted he is a jerk! Come on...that kind of behavior is off the rails. He could have called the non emergency number or nicely told them that they weren't allowed to park there. I would have been very upset if someone did that to me. I very well could have pulled over for an emergency or whatnot. The cyclist had no idea why the people were pulled over or that they had speeding fines.

You (or the PP, if different) described his actions as "typical cyclist entitlement", which is nothing but bigoted, dehumanizing nonsense that feeds a vicious stereotype that is perfectly capable of getting people killed:

I would not have banged on the car, but pulling up beside the car to talk to the driver would have meant that he was blocking a traffic lane and putting himself at risk in the process. Calling 311 would be a complete waste of time - I've done it many times and not once have they responded.

I'm sorry that you are so offended by his banging on a piece of metal, but I'm not particularly inclined to get worked up about others being rude to those who flagrantly violate laws designed to protect vulnerable road users. If someone yells an obscenity at a driver who runs a red light, is that "typical pedestrian behavior"?

Wow, so you are defending this bizarre behavior. I rest my case...I suspect you are one of those entitled bikers.

"Bizarre behavior" is calling someone "entitled" for wanting to be able to use the infrastructure the city has provided to keep them safe. "Bizarre behavior" is spreading dehumanizing stereotypes that get people killed. If calling you out on that makes me an "entitled biker" in your eyes, then so be it.

[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.

So it’s perfectly fine by you for cars to block bike lanes and force cyclists out into the street where they can be killed (a three year died in Chicago when her mother went around a vehicle parked in a bike lane) or, maybe worse by you, slow down traffic? I wouldn't have banged on the trunk but do you think a confrontation would not have ensued had the cyclist instead pulled up beside the driver and asked him to move? Should he have called 911 instead? It's more than a bit revealing that you call the cyclist "entitled" and not the driver, who is illegally parked, obstructing a bike lane, and has racked up $10k in speeding tickets in DC alone. A rather weird set of values you have.

Sorry, but that cyclist even admitted he is a jerk! Come on...that kind of behavior is off the rails. He could have called the non emergency number or nicely told them that they weren't allowed to park there. I would have been very upset if someone did that to me. I very well could have pulled over for an emergency or whatnot. The cyclist had no idea why the people were pulled over or that they had speeding fines.

You (or the PP, if different) described his actions as "typical cyclist entitlement", which is nothing but bigoted, dehumanizing nonsense that feeds a vicious stereotype that is perfectly capable of getting people killed:

I would not have banged on the car, but pulling up beside the car to talk to the driver would have meant that he was blocking a traffic lane and putting himself at risk in the process. Calling 311 would be a complete waste of time - I've done it many times and not once have they responded.

I'm sorry that you are so offended by his banging on a piece of metal, but I'm not particularly inclined to get worked up about others being rude to those who flagrantly violate laws designed to protect vulnerable road users. If someone yells an obscenity at a driver who runs a red light, is that "typical pedestrian behavior"?

Wait, are you saying we get to yell obscenities at cyclists who run red lights? I am very pro that. (DP)

Yelling at anyone - driver, cyclist, or even a pedestrian (such as someone who runs out from behind parked cars straight into the path of a cyclist) - who endangers a vulnerable road user is perfectly justified. A lot of people need to be made more aware that they live in a society and their state of self-absorption can gravely harm others.

Yup I know the type...the worked up bike Karen lol.

I don't think you understand what a "Karen" is. The most infamous one called the cops on a guy for asking her to respect the law that prohibits off-leash dogs in Central Park. Asking people to respect the law is being a good citizen. But maybe you like anarchy or prefer people would call the cops on each other rather than having a conversation, I dunno.

[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.

So it’s perfectly fine by you for cars to block bike lanes and force cyclists out into the street where they can be killed (a three year died in Chicago when her mother went around a vehicle parked in a bike lane) or, maybe worse by you, slow down traffic? I wouldn't have banged on the trunk but do you think a confrontation would not have ensued had the cyclist instead pulled up beside the driver and asked him to move? Should he have called 911 instead? It's more than a bit revealing that you call the cyclist "entitled" and not the driver, who is illegally parked, obstructing a bike lane, and has racked up $10k in speeding tickets in DC alone. A rather weird set of values you have.

Sorry, but that cyclist even admitted he is a jerk! Come on...that kind of behavior is off the rails. He could have called the non emergency number or nicely told them that they weren't allowed to park there. I would have been very upset if someone did that to me. I very well could have pulled over for an emergency or whatnot. The cyclist had no idea why the people were pulled over or that they had speeding fines.

You (or the PP, if different) described his actions as "typical cyclist entitlement", which is nothing but bigoted, dehumanizing nonsense that feeds a vicious stereotype that is perfectly capable of getting people killed:

I would not have banged on the car, but pulling up beside the car to talk to the driver would have meant that he was blocking a traffic lane and putting himself at risk in the process. Calling 311 would be a complete waste of time - I've done it many times and not once have they responded.

I'm sorry that you are so offended by his banging on a piece of metal, but I'm not particularly inclined to get worked up about others being rude to those who flagrantly violate laws designed to protect vulnerable road users. If someone yells an obscenity at a driver who runs a red light, is that "typical pedestrian behavior"?

Wow, so you are defending this bizarre behavior. I rest my case...I suspect you are one of those entitled bikers.

"Bizarre behavior" is calling someone "entitled" for wanting to be able to use the infrastructure the city has provided to keep them safe. "Bizarre behavior" is spreading dehumanizing stereotypes that get people killed. If calling you out on that makes me an "entitled biker" in your eyes, then so be it.

No...bizarre behavior and riding up to a car and banging on the trunk and screaming at them while recording it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Sorry, but that cyclist even admitted he is a jerk! Come on...that kind of behavior is off the rails. He could have called the non emergency number or nicely told them that they weren't allowed to park there. I would have been very upset if someone did that to me. I very well could have pulled over for an emergency or whatnot. The cyclist had no idea why the people were pulled over or that they had speeding fines.

You still don't get to park in the bike lane, just like you don't get to park on the sidewalk.

I got doored once by a driver who didn't look. The driver yelled at me for damaging his car. Fortunately I wasn't injured, but dooring can kill people.

So where does a car pull over for an emergency then? I'm waiting.

In the road.

So basically the driver of a care with an emergency should stop in the middle of the road so the bike lane will be clear. Got it.

Why is it ok for you to block the bike lane or the sidewalk with your car in an emergency, but not the road?