« Virginia Bicycling Federation (VBF) Fall Retreat | Main | Bicycle Safety Enhancement Act of 2008 Hearing »


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

I agree. DDOT's new fifth alternative is sure to kill some bicyclists with both door-zone and contraflow bike lanes that are much too narrow.

Why not eliminate one of the three northbound vehicular travel lanes to create the space needed to make both bike lanes safe? Otherwise, bicyclists should insist on either 1) gaining adequate space for the "door-zone" bike lane by eliminating the more problematic contraflow bike lane or 2) a two-way street design, with or without bike lanes.

I was riding around Capitol Hill on Sunday and found the proliferation of narrow door-zone bike lanes beside narrow travel lanes rather disturbing. Such hazardous bike lanes are much worse than providing no "bicycle facility." They only serve to lull inexperienced bicyclists into danger.

The more bike lane retrofits I see in urban centers, I more I detest them.

If they want two-way bicycle traffic, they have to make the road two-way. Anything else is downright negligent. This is a stretch with ten intersections in 0.87 miles, contraflow cyclists would get creamed -- especially with no traffic signals and the lights timed against them.

The simplest thing is the best thing: just paint a yellow line down the middle, make it two lanes in each direction and be done with it. Bike lanes aren't really appropriate on this road with so many intersections. If they feel they must add facilities, put sharrows in the center of the outside lanes. They're 10-footers, which DC law presumes are not wide enough for sharing.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Banner design by creativecouchdesigns.com

City Paper's Best Local Bike Blog 2009


 Subscribe in a reader