Similarly, the DDOT initiative to create a network of bike lanes lacked depth of planning which has resulted in confusion for all roadway users and questionable safeguards for any of the users. It would have been helpful and prudent if DDOT had accompanied the promotion of bike usage with an aggressive campaign to demonstrate the safe and lawful role for each category of roadway users and an active enforcement of laws governing each of the users. The singular goal was to produce another symbol of the “livability” agenda and to declare victory despite the created tension among pedestrians, bikers, drivers, and public transit operators.
Wow. So much wrong in such a short paragraph.
DDOT has put in quite a bit of planning into it's network of bike lanes. Almost all of the 49 bike lanes we have were defined back in 2005 during the bike plan. And each bike lane gets individual attention from DDOT staff. How much planning is needed anyway. This "inadequate" planning myth is 100% Fenty's fault. Not Klein's. It comes from the fact that DDOT put in bike lanes on Penn and then rebuilt them just before they opened. This was not an engineering decision. This was a political decision. Fenty said it was his call, and not Klein's. Klein (from what I've heard) wanted to leave the lanes, but Fenty was afraid they would hurt him in the election. Ironically, removing them opened him up to criticism for not doing due diligence and probably hurt him more than the bike lanes ever would have. But, there is really is no truth to the complaint that DDOT doesn't properly plan for bike lanes. From what I've seen they plan way more than is needed.
As for education, DDOT pays for WABA to offer free classes on cycling to both adults and children - and has educated thousands as a result. They also do two StreetSmarts campaigns a year. Enforcement is not DDOT's job, it's MPD's. If their criticism is that drivers are terribly ignorant about the law and their place on the road - I agree.
Still, I'd like to see how they think these lack of planning, education and enforcement have manifested themselves. Where is their proof of a lack of these things? And what do they think DDOT should do?
Finally, their claim that the "singular goal was to produce another symbol of the “livability” agenda" is nearly libelous. The goal, as stated several places, is to give residents more transportation options. And the rise in cycling, walking and transit use is evidence that they're achieving their goals.
I think DC residents should fire the Committee of 100.
Clark shows that he is the one out of sync with all residents of the city when he writes, "At the same time that Mr. Klein was focused on bikes and streetcars, daily transportation needs went unaddressed." The many people who walk, ride the bus, or bicycle to work on a daily basis would disagree with Clark's narrow definition of "daily needs."