« Putting the fun back in funneling. | Main | Another reason to be careful »

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

I'm against tearing down the Whitehurst. The problem is that the proposal being floated envisions reconfiguring Water Street to take the traffic now carried by the Whitehurst. In effect, it would take a street now dominated by pedestrian and cyclist traffic, and turn it into a second M street, one block south.

I think a better idea would be to keep the Whitehurst, and force automobiles to use it by closing M street to through motorized traffic. This would make Georgetown dramatically more pleasant, and I suspect it would actually improve traffic flow.

I'm pretty indifferent about Whitehurst Freeway. I would point out, however, that it's a bit of a misnomer to call it a "freeway." The speed limit is something like 35 MPH on it (though the idea that this is followed is, of course, pretty laughable). Also, with such a wide shoulder, it's a really easy stretch of road to ride your bike on - I do all the time, and frankly, it's much better then taking M Street when you want to get from downtown to Key Bridge.

I've never ridden my bike on the Whitehurst. I should give that a shot sometime.

BTW, Roger Lewis wrote about the whitehurst last weekend. He's in favor of removing it.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/04/13/AR2007041300892.html

The Whitehurst is designated as a bike route -- the roadway, not the shoulder!

Sure, the roadway. Some people won't want to do that, though, Contrarian, and there is - really - plenty of room on ths shoulder (providing you keep a keen eye ahead of you for crap on the shoulder when that occasionally happens) - and I'd rather cyclists take advantage of it using the shoulder then not taking advantage of it at all, ya know?

The comments to this entry are closed.

Banner design by creativecouchdesigns.com

City Paper's Best Local Bike Blog 2009

Categories

 Subscribe in a reader