[scoot]

@EasyRider 194014 wrote:

Chris, like you, I’m just baffled by the need for different speed limits for various modes …

Why not just set a universal speed limit of 15-20mph on MUPs and bike lanes, and if you’re in the street, you can go as fast as the posted speed limit (usually 25-30mph).

I agree. Far too complicated. The type of vehicle should not be a factor in setting urban speed limits.

I do however think that the setting should be a factor, with different limits for streets vs. trails vs. sidewalks. Bike lanes should be considered as part of the street, with the same speed limit as required for automobiles. Certainly for un-“protected” lanes, such as those that are immediately adjacent to vehicles, it would be absurd to set a different speed limit. However, I could be convinced that PBLs belong in the trail class with a universal 15-20MPH limit; many PBLs are unsafe at those speeds anyway due to turning conflicts, visibility obscurations, and proximity to pedestrians. I also think it’s reasonable to set a lower speed limit for sidewalks than for PBLs/trails.

[scoot]

Thanks Mark for organizing and everyone else for volunteering. I’m on the West Coast this week, or else I would participate also. Looking forward to seeing what we can learn from the data though!

[scoot]

@lordofthemark 193447 wrote:

Of course there are implicit crosswalks where it is legal to cross, but there is no striping. That presents a problem.

Still should be the driver’s fault. If you can’t see in time to react to someone legally crossing a road, painted crosswalk or no, then you’re out-driving your headlights.

That said, there is a difference between where our legal standard ought to be vs. practical advice for vulnerable road users to minimize one’s chance of becoming a victim in the current environment. I would bet that every single person who has commented on this thread has worn hi-viz or reflective clothing themselves at times while walking or cycling in the DC area.

[scoot]

Reminder: the deadline to submit comments to NPS regarding the GWMP Safety Study is tomorrow.

Thanks to all who helped organize this outing!

[scoot]

@lordofthemark 192660 wrote:

High Visibility Enforcement (HVE) … helpful to “optics” … I would suggest those who ride through Old Town particularly reflect

Thanks for the heads-up. Where can I find a tinfoil helmet?

[scoot]

@lordofthemark 192660 wrote:

High Visibility Enforcement (HVE)

Will my bright chartreuse jersey pass muster?

[scoot]

The Dutch intersection in the GIF facilitates straight-through cycling at moderate speeds. With the Silver Spring design shown, cyclists would have to slow down substantially just to navigate the sharp turns, let alone opposite-direction riders. Also, pedestrians will choose the shortest route across the street and many will step into the path without looking. The gentler curvature of the Dutch version (and higher cycling mode share) provides more encouragement for peds to use the crosswalk exactly where it is painted.

[scoot]

Is a driver legally considered to have been “involved” in a situation like this, when they did not experience any collision or injury themselves but committed actions that arguably contributed to or caused the incident?

[scoot]

Maryland has a law requiring bike lane usage. The intersection design presented here is an excellent example of why we need to push for repeal of such laws.

[scoot]

I would be curious to learn if collisions along this cycletrack have disproportionately affected southbound cyclists. (And for other facilities of similar designs.)

One would expect that drivers are far more accustomed to seeing bicyclists riding on the right edge of a street than bicyclists riding on the left edge of a street. So perhaps they are more likely to check for cyclists approaching from the south than for “salmons” coming from the north? Yes, pedestrians do travel both ways, but at much lower speeds.

[scoot]

Or … put the southbound bike lane on the southbound side of the street?

[scoot]

Legislative Priorities:

1) Fix contributory negligence
2) Distracted driving ban
3) allow more camera enforcement for speeding and red light violations

I’ll try to attend the first half of the meeting but will need to leave before 8.

[scoot]

@Steve O 192026 wrote:

Probably the most dramatic casualty of yesterday’s flood was the bridge in Glen Carlyn that used to be here:
[ATTACH=CONFIG]20220[/ATTACH]

From ARLnow: As of last night, the an Arlington Dept. of Parks and Recreation spokeswoman said the department was aware of “at least six pedestrian bridges adjacent to the Four Mile Run stream and one storage building at Bon Air Park” which have been washed away.

Apparently there are five additional ped bridges gone?

[scoot]

There’s only a few blocks of city streets on that route, so there’s not much room for improvement by that criterion. One could certainly walk against traffic along M for two blocks (from RCP & Pennsylvania to 25th & M) if Penn to 25th is a deal-breaker.

If you prefer MVT over Ohio Drive, you could cross at Memorial Bridge (but then of course you have to deal with Mem Circle) or TR Bridge (Trollheim plus the narrow TR Bridge itself). Getting to RCP trail is easy from either. It comes down to personal preference.

[scoot]

On Military between Marcey and Old Glebe, I am constantly going back and forth between the bike lane and the general travel lane. On a weekend when recreational bike traffic increases, I frequently both pass and get passed by same-direction bicycles. If the bike lanes were cordoned off by parked cars and/or bollards, all this maneuvering would be either unnecessarily dangerous or impossible.

To accommodate a variety of riders, you need a design for bike lanes that allows for a quick lane change between the general lane and bicycle lane almost anywhere along the lane.

[Author]

Posts