King Street Bike Lanes

[PotomacCyclist]

The saga of the bike lanes has been very confusing, but I’m glad to see that they are going forward with at least a compromise plan.

As for comments in various media, it doesn’t seem that the extremist views will be taken too seriously. One person is claiming that more bikes will present a significant increase in danger to others. Huh? As if all of the speeding cars with drivers who are texting is somehow safe for anyone? I really don’t understand the mindset.

(However, if I think back to 10 years ago, I didn’t think much about these issues. I’m not sure what I would have thought about this issue back then. Hopefully more people base their statements and opinions on actual experiences and data, not on ignorant prejudices about multimodal transportation.)

[scorchedearth]

As I had suspected, this isn’t quite over. Residents of King Street and the surrounding neighborhoods intend to argue their point to city council with the goal being to have the council override Baier’s decision on January 25, 2014.

Saturday, 25 January, 2014 9:30 AM
City Council Chambers
Alexandria City Hall

I hope to see some people there advocating for these bike lanes. Thanks.

[PotomacCyclist]

A commenter on the Patch article reports that some local residents are now installing personal signs along the street, stating that bike lanes are unsafe.

http://oldtownalexandria.patch.com/groups/politics-and-elections/p/tes-director-city-will-move-forward-with-king-street-bike-lanes

[Fast Friendly Guy]

@lordofthemark 63941 wrote:

Thats a question that was around long before Ken Arrow, and I think is more philosophical than economic. I can accept that there issues when comparing utility across different incomes (does one dollar mean more or less to someone earning 20k than to someone earning 300k – and what does that tell us about BCA of big things like healthcare reform, or minimum wages) I personally very much doubt that its an issue between the owners of million dollar homes on King Street and average cyclists. I would say in that case its a tertiary order effect – if not actually obfuscation

I just love to see economists having fun!

[Fast Friendly Guy]

@OneEighth 64007 wrote:

Still think the best sort of traffic calming is a consistent police presence. Probably would pay for itself on Washington Blvd.

I’m an economist, too. In fact I teach economics, and I agree with OneEighth that accountability is the answer enforced by police presence or better still, speed cameras and fines. In my opinion for traffic ‘calming,’ passive controls (speed bumps/curb narrowing) will never work as well.

[peterw_diy]

@Fast Friendly Guy 74473 wrote:

In my opinion for traffic ‘calming,’ passive controls (speed bumps/curb narrowing) will never work as well.

Perhaps (probably depends on the level and frequency of enforcement), but bike lanes here would be essentially free. The city has to paint the roadway, it’s just a question of whether to paint bike lane stripes or parking space boxes.

Please attend on the 25th if you can, even if you don’t speak. It would be helpful for council to see lots of people nodding in agreement with those speaking in favor of adding bike lanes.

[bobco85]

I was curious to see the reported anti-bike lane signs along King Street, and lo and behold, they were there. I counted at least 30 signs on both sides of the road, although they were only at a couple of houses. I took some pics of the 5 most common ones (there were many repeats of the small white signs)

[ATTACH=CONFIG]4462[/ATTACH][ATTACH=CONFIG]4463[/ATTACH][ATTACH=CONFIG]4464[/ATTACH][ATTACH=CONFIG]4465[/ATTACH][ATTACH=CONFIG]4466[/ATTACH]

Interesting to note: none of the signs said anything about needing parking spaces, property values, bike lobby shoving lanes down throats, etc.

Also to note (I took these pictures around 11:30 am today): there were 3 cars parked on the entire affected stretch. Good news, I guess there won’t be any shortage of parking!

[lordofthemark]

@Fast Friendly Guy 74473 wrote:

I’m an economist, too. In fact I teach economics, and I agree with OneEighth that accountability is the answer enforced by police presence or better still, speed cameras and fines. In my opinion for traffic ‘calming,’ passive controls (speed bumps/curb narrowing) will never work as well.

My sense is that the current state of the art is that speed bumps are seldom BCA positive, but narrowing lanes and other things to give the feel of a slower designed road and make driving slower can be worthwhile. Enforcement to drive slowly on a road designed for a higher speed, on the other hand, has a lesser payback. Traffic calming that has other benefits (like a bump out that provides a haven for pedestrians, or bike lanes) can have an even better BCA.

[mattotoole]

@bobco85 74483 wrote:

Interesting to note: none of the signs said anything about needing parking spaces, property values, bike lobby shoving lanes down throats, etc.

Also to note (I took these pictures around 11:30 am today): there were 3 cars parked on the entire affected stretch. Good news, I guess there won’t be any shortage of parking!

So a handful of people are scraping the bottom of the barrel for any argument against taking away the free street parking that they’ve been privileged to enjoy. Naturally they’re trying to make it about something else.

BTW there are usually 3 cars parked. I live further up King St., and ride or walk this stretch every day. There’s no street parking on my block and no one’s driveway fits more than 2 cars. One reason I don’t own a car is no place to park it! Why should these people’s parking be anyone else’s problem?

[KLizotte]

These signs crack me up. If the street is too narrow for bike lanes then it is simply too narrow to offer on street parking. A bike lane takes up less space than parking spaces.

It further burns me up to see this attitude in front of a house that is clearly huge! If you can afford that much house, you can afford to have built a bigger driveway/garage and give back to society. Full stop.

[peterw_diy]

@mattotoole 74498 wrote:

So a handful of people are scraping the bottom of the barrel for any argument against taking away the free street parking that they’ve been privileged to enjoy. Naturally they’re trying to make it about something else.[/quote]

Bingo. Well, more than a handful. They’re finding sympathy from car-addicted self-proclaimed-conservatives that see the act of promoting cycling as “anticar.” And some locals who persistently criticize Alexandria city government on big issues (zoning master plan changes, bringing DOD to the west end, etc.) see another chance to complain.

This should not come down to a question of who can get more people to write Council or show up at City Hall, but if we supporters of bicycle infrastructure don’t maintain a significant presence, the residents of those few blocks have a much better chance of derailing this, and future improvements.

Quote:

BTW there are usually 3 cars parked.

The city surveyed the parking usage multiple times, and IIRC never saw more than 6 spaces in use; I think the average was about 3. The current plan that these residents are so angry about retains 10 existing spaces and adds 3 more just across the street.

Quote:

I live further up King St., and ride or walk this stretch every day. There’s no street parking on my block and no one’s driveway fits more than 2 cars.

On average, the houses in this stretch have off-street parking for nearly 3 cars each (those on the south side have and use parking off the alleys behind their houses). Everyone has room for at least one car off-street. Only two of the roughly 40 houses can’t fit two cars on their property; one is on the block retaining its 10 spaces, the other is the first house in the adjacent block.

[peterw_diy]

@KLizotte 74503 wrote:

These signs crack me up. If the street is too narrow for bike lanes then it is simply too narrow to offer on street parking. A bike lane takes up less space than parking spaces.

Actually I think the combined width of eastbound and westbound bike lanes is greater than the old parking spaces on the westbound side. Certainly the new parking spaces, at 7′, will be narrower than the 8-9′ of total bike lane width. Part of this plan is making the auto lanes narrower. Staff explained that traffic engineers used to think that wider lanes were safer, but now it is understood that wide lanes lead to increased speed. So the lanes will narrow from about 12′ to 10.5′ — well within standards for a 25 mph urban road like this stretch of King. Traffic engineering literature suggests this will reduce the auto speeds by a few mph, which will make the road safer for everyone.

[peterw_diy]

@bobco85 74483 wrote:

I was curious to see the reported anti-bike lane signs along King Street, and lo and behold, they were there. I counted at least 30 signs on both sides of the road, although they were only at a couple of houses. I took some pics of the 5 most common ones

Thanks for posting the pictures. BTW, one of the anti-bike neighbors is alleging that some of these signs have been taken down. I don’t advocate such behavior, but your pictures show that they’re planting signs right next to the sidewalk. The city generally owns a foot or two of land on the house side of the sidewalk, so it may well be that many of these signs aren’t even legal. If I recall correctly, back when Alexandria was deliberating the waterfront plan, City staff removed such signs from public right-of-way, citing its zoning ordinance.

[cyclingfool]

Not me on the stealing. Though any one of those signs and the debate/result they represent would only be a great souvenir of a triumph of rational decision making for the greater good over NIMBYism and hyperbole.

[scorchedearth]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/dc-politics/king-street-bike-lanes-brake-for-an-appeal/2014/01/23/57b7adfa-83b7-11e3-9dd4-e7278db80d86_story.html

The King Street project opponents are wielding a 50 year old law to force the bike lane proposal to go to additional hearings and come up for a vote at a city council meeting in March. There’s nothing like using bureaucracy to stymie a project you don’t like while complaining about it in reference to others.

There will be two additional hearings. One will be in front of the Traffic and Parking Board on February 24, 2014 and the other will be at a City Council meeting on March 15, 2014. Let’s aim for a solid turnout for both so that we can finalize this and get a new bike lane.

[Author]

Posts