Now that I ride Metro so much more, and take my bike on it, I find myself often using elevators and the handicapped turnstiles (HT). When with a bike on metro you basically find yourself following the same patterns as the handicapped. Usually this means down an elevator, through the HT set aside and then to another elevator. Since there's no choice about it, I often wonder why more thought wasn't used in designing the locations of these items. At New Carrollton, the HT is all the way across the mezzanine from the entrance and then the next elevator all the way back by the entrance. It makes for as long a trip as possible. Now, for me it's only a small inconvenience, but I'm often riding elevators with people in wheelchairs or on crutches and I get angry for them. (The same goes with curb cuts - just no thought about the easiest path).
I also find there are is shockingly large number of people, with seemingly no disability, who ride the elevator even though it's slower. I suspect that the more an elevator is used the more it fails - though I'm not sure - so it annoys me a little bit and I'm not the only one. I really think that Metro managers and board members should have to negotiate metro in a wheelchair one day a year - just so they get the feel for it and can understand how design impacts experience.
RPUS wrote about how being a cyclist has given him a better cyclist perspective. It'd be nice if DDOT employees were required to bike to work one day a year. Then they could avoid these kinds of problems which we've also experienced.
When the city removed some 160 parking meters on Newbury Street and replaced them with 23 boxy, multiple-space, computerized meters, cyclists found themselves without their habitual, if illegal, locking posts. Cyclists are complaining that officials haven't provided alternative places to park bikes, and now bicycles can be seen chained to trees, sign posts, wrought-iron fences and just about anything else skinny enough to get a bike lock around.